Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “space”

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 1,657 records · Page 92
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2004

Oh! I Slipped the Surly Bounds of Earth....and Ran into Space Weather!

Over the past decade the concept of space weather has been introduced and matured in both the scientific community and popular press. Likewise the concept of space climatology recently also is being advanced. Closely linked to these concepts are their impacts on ground- and space-based technological systems; one such system commonly mentioned is manned space flight exemplified by the Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS). From a manned space flight perspective, space weather and space climatology have significant effects on the amount of radiation exposure received by humans in space from the ambient high-energy charged particles present in interplanetary space and trapped in the geomagnetosphere. Whereas the impact of space weather for most technological systems is usually discrete and well correlated in time, the principle impact of space weather and space climatology is to increase the probability of latent cancer formation in thetraveler cohort. In this regard, while space weather may be the dominating factor for a given mission, over the life of a long-term program such as the Space Shuttle or ISS space climatology is the controlling factor of latent cancer risk. Human radiation exposure enhancements associated with space weather disturbances has been a concern among scientist and mission controllers since the inception of manned spaceflight nearly forty years ago. This led NASA to develop, in conjunction with the Environmental Science Services Administration s Space Disturbance Forecast Center and the USAF/AWS, the Solar Particle Alert Network (SPAN)-the foundation of an initial U.S. space weather monitoring and forecasting service. Since Apollo, routine space flight operations have evolved to include the use of space weather and climatology data provided through a world-wide network of operational space weather data services to predict and recommend actions to minimize astronaut radiation exposures. NASA Space Radiation Analysis Group (SRAG) flight controllers use real-time space weather data to detect and assess the impact of solar particle events, outer electron belt enhancements, the formation of pseudo-stable additional trapped radiation belts, and the solar cycle modulation of trapped radiation belts and galactic cosmic rays. Energetic particle data from GOES spacecraft are automatically ingested from NOAA Space Environment Center data servers and used to drive a model for the estimating the exposure to astronauts from solar particle events. While adequate for current manned space flight support, the existing operational space weather support system requires improvements to address the anticipated evolution in both the character of manned missions as well as space flight operations management. Necessary space weather data improvements include: reliably available (near) real-time space weather data on a fixed schedule via redundant access methods that support autonomous data acquisition by computer systems behind enterprise firewalls; and rapid transition of promising research sensors into operational systems.

Golightly, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Space Resources

Space resources must be used to support life on the Moon and exploration of Mars. Just as the pioneers applied the tools they brought with them to resources they found along the way rather than trying to haul all their needs over a long supply line, so too must space travelers apply their high technology tools to local resources. The pioneers refilled their water barrels at each river they forded; moonbase inhabitants may use chemical reactors to combine hydrogen brought from Earth with oxygen found in lunar soil to make their water. The pioneers sought temporary shelter under trees or in the lee of a cliff and built sod houses as their first homes on the new land; settlers of the Moon may seek out lava tubes for their shelter or cover space station modules with lunar regolith for radiation protection. The pioneers moved further west from their first settlements, using wagons they had built from local wood and pack animals they had raised; space explorers may use propellant made at a lunar base to take them on to Mars. The concept for this report was developed at a NASA-sponsored summer study in 1984. The program was held on the Scripps campus of the University of California at San Diego (UCSD), under the auspices of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). It was jointly managed under the California Space Inst. and the NASA Johnson Space Center, under the direction of the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST) at NASA Headquarters. The study participants (listed in the addendum) included a group of 18 university teachers and researchers (faculty fellows) who were present for the entire 10-week period and a larger group of attendees from universities, Government, and industry who came for a series of four 1-week workshops. The organization of this report follows that of the summer study. Space Resources consists of a brief overview and four detailed technical volumes: (1) Scenarios; (2) Energy, Power, and Transport; (3) Materials; (4) Social Concerns. Although many of the included papers got their impetus from workshop discussions, most have been written since then, thus allowing the authors to base new applications on established information and tested technology. All these papers have been updated to include the authors' current work. This overview, drafted by faculty fellow Jim Burke, describes the findings of the summer study, as participants explored the use of space resources in the development of future space activities and defined the necessary research and development that must precede the practical utilization of these resources. Space resources considered included lunar soil, oxygen derived from lunar soil, material retrieved from near-Earth asteroids, abundant sunlight, low gravity, and high vacuum. The study participants analyzed the direct use of these resources, the potential demand for products from them, the techniques for retrieving and processing space resources, the necessary infrastructure, and the economic tradeoffs. This is certainly not the first report to urge the utilization of space resources in the development of space activities. In fact, Space Resources may be seen as the third of a trilogy of NASA Special Publications reporting such ideas arising from similar studies. It has been preceded by Space Settlements: A Design Study (NASA SP-413) and Space Resources and Space Settlements (NASA SP-428). And other, contemporaneous reports have responded to the same themes. The National Commission on Space, led by Thomas Paine, in Pioneering the Space Frontier, and the NASA task force led by astronaut Sally Ride, in Leadership and America's Future in Space, also emphasize expansion of the space Infrastructure; more detailed exploration of the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; an early start on the development of the technology necessary for using space resources; and systematic development of the skills necessary for long-term human presence in space. Our report does not represent any Government-authorized view or official NASA policy. NASA's official response to these challenging opportunities must be found in the reports of its Office of Exploration, which was established in 1987. That office's report, released in November 1989, of a 90-day study of possible plans for human exploration of the Moon and Mars is NASA's response to the new initiative proposed by President Bush on July 20, 1989, the 20th anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing on the Moon: "First, for the coming decade, for the 1990s, Space Station Freedom, our critical next step in all our space endeavors. And next, for the new century, back to the Moon, back to the future, and this time, back to stay. And then a journey into tomorrow, a journey to another planet, a manned mission to Mars." This report, Space Resources, offers substantiation for NASA's bid to carry out that new initiative.

McKay, Mary Fae↗
DOE OSTI2018

Space in 21st Century Conflict: Calibrating Risks, Tailoring Strategies (Workshop Summary)

U.S. strategic thinking on outer space security has been slow to evolve since the 1990s and the DoD finds itself struggling to develop an adaptive and cohesive strategy for the domain. Russia and China, however, have been thinking about space in a holistic and integrated way for some time. Both countries recognize that U.S. conventional strength relies heavily on technologies and systems enabled by space-based assets. Thus, holding those assets at risk represents an opportunity to asymmetrically counter America’s ability to project power. China and Russia been developing a suite of anti-satellite (ASAT) capabilities to accomplish this, to include direct-ascent weapons, space-based weapons, jammers, and cyber capabilities; both countries have also incorporated these systems into their respective tactical and strategic planning. This represents a serious threat to U.S. power projection and assurance of our regional allies and partners. Assuring the U.S.’s ability to operate in space is paramount for supporting regional security missions in both Europe and East Asia. Assuring DoD operations and capabilities in outer space, however, remains a challenge for the defense community. One solution offered by strategists is to enhance U.S. resiliency in space to turn the domain from offense dominant to defense dominant. This, they argue, can be achieved by improving space situational awareness (SSA), protecting space assets with active and passive countermeasures, disaggregating assets and leveraging new commercial space capabilities, and integrating allied space capabilities. However, many barriers remain to accomplishing these objectives. For example, some think that the classified nature of many U.S. space activities is an obstacle to deepening cooperation with commercial partners and allies. Others acknowledge the lack of a working model for incorporating cheaper, diverse, and scalable commercial space systems. Identifying where space fits into broader U.S. deterrence strategies is a subject of contention. While discussions over the past few years have focused on the practicability of deterring attacks on space assets via cross-domain threats, this line of thinking has yielded few useful insights. Consequently, defense practitioners have more recently shifted to thinking of space as part of an integrated deterrence concept, one that envisions building resiliency and defenses into our space architecture while simultaneously holding an adversary’s space-based assets at risk to enhance deterrence more broadly. However, both approaches illuminate a larger problem in the discussion of the relationship between space and deterrence: there is a lack of consensus on what it is we are trying to deter, how space fits into broader deterrence and strategic constructs, and the role of space in extended deterrence and assurance of allies. For example, is the United States’ priority to discourage attacks in space, to ensure regional power projection and alliance support capabilities, to deter broader global conflict or all of the above? Answering such questions will be an important step toward integrating space into a comprehensive defense strategy.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
NASA NTRS1998

General Public Space Travel and Tourism: Executive Summary - Volume 1

Travel and tourism is one of the world's largest businesses. Its gross revenues exceed $400 billion per year in the U.S. alone, and it is our second largest employer. U.S. private sector business revenues in the space information area now approximate $10 billion per year, and are increasing rapidly. Not so in the human spaceflight area. After spending $100s of billions (1998 dollars) in public funds thereon, and continuing to spend over $5 billion per year, the government is still the only customer for human spaceflight goods and services. Serious and detailed consideration was first given to the possibility of space being opened up to trips by the general public three decades ago, and some initial attempts to do so were made a dozen years ago. But the difficulties were great and the Challenger disaster put an end to them. In recent years professional space tourism studies have been conducted in the United Kingdom, Germany and, especially, Japan. In the U.S., technological progress has been pronounced; we have had nearly a decade's experience in seeing our astronauts travel to-from low Earth orbit (LEO) safely, and we expect to commence assembly of a LEO space station housing a half-dozen people this year. Too, NASA and our space industry now have new and promising space transportation development programs underway, especially the X-33 and X-34 programs, and some related, further generation, basic technology development programs. And five private companies are also working on the design of new surface - LEO vehicles. The first professional space tourism market studies have been conducted in several countries in the past few years, especially in Japan and here. The U.S. study makes it clear that, conceptually, tens of millions of us would like to take a trip to space if we could do so with reasonable safety, comfort and reliability, and at an acceptable price. Initial businesses will address the desires of those willing to pay a greater price and accept a greater risk. A two-year cooperative Space Act agreement study has been conducted by our National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Space Transportation Association. It was conducted by NASA and STA study leaders drawing upon the competence, experience and hard-nosed imagination of a national Steering Group and scores of attendees at a multi-day Workshop. The study has involved scores of professionals and business people from various areas: astronauts; space booster technology and operations professionals; a hotel architect and a hotel operator; an airline planner; insurance underwriters; space sickness experts; space theme park designers; space and travel and tourism association and business executives; a space-related financier; university tourism and space policy experts; present and former space-responsible government officials; space entrepreneurs; space writers; This study concludes that serious national attention should now be given to activities that would enable the expansion of today's terrestrial space tourism businesses, and the creation of in-space travel and tourism businesses. Indeed, it concludes that, in time, it should become a very important part of our Country's overall commercial and civil space business-program structure.

ONeil, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS1992

Utilization of Space Station Freedom for technology research

Space Station Freedom presents a unique opportunity for technology developers to conduct research in the space environment. Research can be conducted in the pressurized volume of the Space Station's laboratories or attached to the Space Station truss in the vacuum of space. Technology developers, represented by the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST), will have 12 percent of the available Space Station resources (volume, power, data, crew, etc.) to use for their research. Most technologies can benefit from research on Space Station Freedom and all these technologies are represented in the OAST proposed traffic model. This traffic model consists of experiments that have been proposed by technology developers but not necessarily selected for flight. Experiments to be flown in space will be selected through an Announcement of Opportunity (A.O.) process. The A.O. is expected to be released in August, 1992. Experiments will generally fall into one of the 3 following categories: (1) Individual technology experiments; (2) Instrumented Space Station; and (3) Guest investigator program. The individual technology experiments are those that do not instrument the Space Station nor directly relate to the development of technologies for evolution of Space Station or development of advanced space platforms. The Instrumented Space Station category is similar to the Orbiter Experiments Program and allows the technology developer to instrument subsystems on the Station or develop instrumentation packages that measure products or processes of the Space Station for the advancement of space platform technologies. The guest investigator program allows the user to request data from Space Station or other experiments for independent research. When developing an experiment, a developer should consider all the resources and infrastructure that Space Station Freedom can provide and take advantage of these to the maximum extent possible. Things like environment, accommodations, carriers, and integration should all be taken into account. In developing experiments at Langley Research Center, an iterative approach is proving useful. This approach uses Space Station utilization and subsystem experts to advise and critique experiment designs to take advantage of everything the Space Station has to offer. Also, solid object modeling and animation computer tools are used to fully visualize the experiment and its processes. This process is very useful for attached payloads and allows problems to be detected early in the experiment design phase.

Avery, Don E.↗
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 NTRS1998

New Space Industries for the Next Millennium

New Space Industries For the Next Millennium is a final report of the findings from the New Space Industries Workshop held in Washington, DC, in February 1998. The primary purpose of this workshop was to identify what must be done to develop new markets, and to generate plans, milestones and new organizational relationships designed to facilitate the goal of space development. This document provides a summary report on the results of that workshop and is not intended as a statement of NASA or government policy. Previous studies had shown great potential for the development of new markets in space (e.g., travel and entertainment, space solar power, satellite and space transfer services, research and development in space, space manufacturing, and space resources), and a great need for coordination and formation of infrastructures (e.g., space transportation, space business parks, and space utilities), to facilitate the growth of new space businesses. The New Space Industries Workshop brought together government, academia, and industry participants from several previous studies and other professionals interested in the development of space for commercial purposes. Their participation provided input into the role of government and industry in space development as well as the technology needs that will enable space development. The opening of the frontier of space, not just to government missions but to private individuals and commercial business, is a challenge of overarching importance. It is our hope that the workshop and this final report continue in earnest the process of identifying and overcoming the barriers to large-scale public access and development of space in the early years of the next century.

Smitherman, D. V., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Global Trends in Space Access and Utilization

In the not-so-distant past, space access and air/space technology superiority were within the purview of the U.S. and former Soviet Union's respective space agencies, both vying for global leadership in space exploitation. In more recent years, with the emergence of the European Space Agency (ESA) member countries and Asian countries joining the family of space-faring nations, it is truer now more than ever that space access and utilization has become a truly global enterprise. In fact, according to the Space Report 2007, this enterprise is a $251-billion economy. It is possible to gauge the vitality of worldwide efforts from open sources in today's transparent, media-based society. In particular, print and web broadcasters regularly report and catalog global space activities for defense and civil purposes. For the purposes of this paper, a representative catalog of missions is used to illustrate the nature of the emerging "globalization." This paper highlights global trends in terms of not only the providers of space access, but also the end-users for the various recently accomplished missions. With well over 50 launches per year, in recent years, the launch-log reveals a surprising percentage of "cooperative or co-dependent missions" where different agencies, countries, and/or commercial entities are so engaged presumably to the benefit of all who participate. Statistics are cited and used to show that recently over d0% of the 50-plus missions involved multiple nations working collectively to deliver payloads to orbit. Observers, space policy professionals, and space agency leaders have eloquently proposed that it might require the combined resources and talents of multiple nations to advance human exploration goals beyond low earth orbit. This paper does not intend to offer new information with respect to whether international collaboration is necessary but to observe that, in continuing to monitor global trends, the results seem to support the thesis that a global interdependent effort with all its likely complexities is an increasingly viable and pragmatic option. The discussion includes a breakdown of space missions into those of civil (scientific), military, and strictly commercial nature. It concludes that all three are robust components of a globally diversified portfolio of activities relying, essentially, on a common space industrial base and space infrastructure. As in other industries, the distribution of space industry assets and knowledge across countries and continents enables a diverse suite of options and arrangements, particularly in the areas of civil and commercial space utilization. A survey of several ongoing bilateral and multilateral space collaboration examples are provided to augment the observations regarding multinational work in space.

Rahman, Shamim A.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Commercialization is Required for Sustainable Space Exploration and Development

The U.S. Space Exploration policy outlines an exciting new direction in space for human and robotic exploration and development beyond low Earth orbit. Pressed by this new visionary guidance, human civilization will be able to methodically build capabilities to move off Earth and into the solar system in a step-by-step manner, gradually increasing the capability for humans to stay longer in space and move further away from Earth. The new plans call for an implementation that would create an affordable and sustainable program in order to span over generations of explorers, each new generation pushing back the boundaries and building on the foundations laid by the earlier. To create a sustainable program it is important to enable and encourage the development of a selfsupporting commercial space industry leveraging both traditional and non-traditional segments of the industrial base. Governments will not be able to open the space frontier on their own because their goals change over relatively short timescales and because the large costs associated with human spaceflight cannot be sustained. A strong space development industrial sector is needed that can one day support the needs of commercial space enterprises as well as provide capabilities that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and other national space agencies can buy to achieve their exploration goals. This new industrial space sector will someday provide fundamental capabilities like communications, power, logistics, and even cargo and human space transportation, just as commercial companies are able to provide these services on Earth today. To help develop and bolster this new space industrial sector, NASA and other national space agencies can enable and facilitate it in many ways, including reducing risk by developing important technologies necessary for commercialization of space, and as a paying customer, partner, or anchor tenant. This transition from all or mostly government developed and operated facilities and services to commercial supplied facilities and services should be considered from the very earliest stages of planning. This paper will first discuss the importance of space commercialization to fulfilling national goals and the associated policy and strategic objectives that will enable space exploration and development. Then the paper will offer insights into how government can provide leadership to promote the nascent commercial space industry. In addition, the paper describes programs and policies already in place at NASA and offers five important principles government can use to strengthen space industry.

Martin, Gary L.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Space Resources and Mining: Current Objectives, Plans, and Missions

Why are Space Resources and Their Use Important? There are many reasons why people and nations want to explore space, and there are many different ways in which space can be explored. A critical interface linking both the ‘why’ and the ‘how’ of space exploration is the identification, extraction, and use of resources in space. In both NASA’s Journey to Mars: Pioneering Next Steps in Space Exploration released in October of 2015 and the Global Exploration Roadmap released in August 2013, the ability to find, quantify, extract, process, and use space resources was identified as a critical objective by NASA and over 14 other space agencies for achieving affordable and sustainable human exploration beyond Earth’s orbit, encouraging and creating new commercial entities and markets based on space activities, and increasing the terrestrial economy and quality-of-life benefits for all humankind. Robotic and especially human space exploration up to this point in time can be considered to be ‘Earth reliant’ in that everything needed to support and enable the mission is launched from Earth. The past Apollo missions to the Moon and the International Space Station currently in orbit above the Earth all rely on hardware, habitats, power, transportation, and life support consumables sent from Earth to keep the crew alive and working. As the distance from Earth increases, the cost of transportation and the risks due to failures and logistics disruptions also increases. By using resources found at the site of exploration to make mission critical consumables (such as propellants, fuel cell reactants and life support commodities), spare parts, and infrastructure needed to support surface activities (such as landing pads, roads, habitats/shelters, and power/thermal systems) commonly referred to as In Situ Resource Utilization, a significant amount of launch mass and cost can be saved and risk reduced. The ability to do these things also changes how exploration is performed from Earth Reliant to NASA’s goal of ‘Earth Independent’ exploration. After the US Apollo program was over, people began to recognize that it had been an inspiration for a generation of young students to go into Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) fields, and that the US industry and economy had significantly grown and lived off these students and the technological advances made to achieve these missions for decades. Space exploration should no longer be focused solely on scientific advancement or national pride, but for economic growth and population standard of living advancement. Considering the economic value of human exploration and how it could expand the economy of the US was brought to full light in a speech by John Marburger, the director of US Office of Science and Technology Policy under George W Bush at the Goddard Symposium in 2006. In his speech he highlighted that the ultimate goal was not to just Explore space but to Use space for the benefit of mankind. He further stated that the use of off-planet resources, in this case from the Moon, should be a critical architectural consideration for human space exploration to make it more affordable and sustainable. This could be achieved in two ways. The first is to start by encouraging and commercializing the extraction and production of transportation and life support related products from space resources, which could than lead to other resource uses once an affordable transportation architecture is established. The second is to encourage the spin-in of terrestrial technologies into space applications and spin-off of space technologies into terrestrial applications to increase the efficiency and profitability of terrestrial industries.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Understanding the Space Weathering of Mercury Through Laboratory Experiments

Introduction: Airless surfaces across the solar system are continually modified by energetic particles from solar wind and micrometeoroid bombardment [1,2]. This process is known as space weathering, and it alters the chemical, microstructural, and optical properties of surface regoliths on airless bodies, including Mercury. On the Moon and S-type asteroids, the reflectance spectral signatures of space weathering include reddening (increasing reflectance with increasing wavelength), darkening (lowering of reflectance), and the attenuation of characteristic absorption bands [2]. Such spectral changes are driven by the production of Fe-bearing nanoparticles(npFe) through both solar wind irradiation and micrometeoroid bombardment. While our understanding of space weathering for the Moon and near-Earth S-types asteroids is advanced, insight into how these processes operate on other planetary bodies is limited. In particular, Mercury experiences a uniquely intense space weathering environment than planetary counterparts at 1 AU, including a moreintense solar wind flux and higher velocity micrometeoroid impacts [4]. Additionally, Mercury has a surface composition unique in the inner solar system, including regions of the surface with very low albedo known as the low reflectance material (LRM), which is enriched in carbon, likely graphite, up to 4wt.% [5].In addition, the concentration of Fe across Mercury’s surface islow (<2 wt.%) compared to the Moonor S-type asteroids asteroids[6]. Our understanding of the effects of space weathering on C-rich and Fe-poor phases is limited. Since Fe plays a critical role inthe development of space weathering characteristicson other airless surfaces(e.g., npFe), its limited availability may significantly affect the development of space weathering features in Mercury surface materials. We can simulate space weathering processes in the laboratory to explore their effects on the microstructural, chemical, and spectral characteristics of Mercury surface materials[7]. Here we used pulsed laser irradiation to simulate the short duration, high-temperature events associated with micrometeoroid impacts. We performed coordinated analyses including reflectance spectroscopy and electron microscopy to investigate the spectral, chemical, and microstructural changes in these mercurian analog samples. Methods: For these experiments, we usedforsteritic olivine with varying FeOcontents, a mineral phase proposed to be abundant on the surface of Mercury. We mixed each sample with graphite to simulate LRM regions of the surface. Wesynthesized the olivinesamplesat 1-bar at NASA’s Johnson Space Centerand prepared pressed powder pellets for laser irradiation [8].We prepared three samples, each with a base layer of olivineto maintain structural integrity and topped witha surface layer containing the graphite-olivine mixture: 1) Sample SC-001 San Carlos olivine(Fo90.91),2)Sample F-S-002 with0.05 wt.% FeO olivine, and 3) F-T-004 with 0.53 wt.% FeO olivine. Each sample was mixed with 5 wt.% powdered graphite and had grain sizes ranging from 45to 125μm. We irradiated each sample usinga pulsed Nd-YAG laser, (l=1064 nm, ~6 ns pulse duration, energy of 48 mJ/pulse) while undervacuumat Northern Arizona University. The laser was rastered1x and then 5x over the surfaceof each sample to simulate progressive space weathering. We collected in situreflectance spectra from the samples after each laser pulse witha Nicolet IS50 Fourier-Transform Infrared spectrometer (lfrom 0.65-2.5 μm). We used an FEI Nova NanoSEM200scanning electron microscope (SEM) and a Hitachi TM4000 Plus benchtop SEM at Purdue University to image the surface morphology and topography of the samples. We extracted thin sections for analysis in the transmission electron microscope(TEM)using the FEI Helios NanoLab 660 focused ion beam (FIB) SEM at the University of Arizona.We performed analysis of the microstructural and chemical characteristics of the samples using the 200 keV JEOL 2500 scanning TEM at Johnson Space Center. Reflectance Spectroscopy Results:Reflectance spectra for each sample are shown in Fig. 1.SC-001:The spectrum of the unirradiated sample exhibits a weak 1.0 μm absorption feature, associated with Fe2+in the olivine,and low overall reflectance (Fig. 1a). Thereflectance and the depth of the absorption band increases after 1x laser raster but are at their lowest after 5x laser rasters.F-T-004:The unirradiated sample has a blue-sloped spectrum with low reflectance without identifiable absorption features (Fig. 1b). With progressive laser irradiation, the sample reflectance increases and becomes strongly red-sloped.F-S-002:The unirradiated sample exhibits a dark, blue-slopedspectrum. The brightness of the sample increases significantly from <0.2average reflectance over >0.8 reflectance in the most irradiated sampleand thespectral slope also becomesslightly reddened (Fig. 1c). Microstructural and Chemical Analysis: Two primary alteration textures were observed in the samples exposed to simulated space weathering: 1) fluffy C-rich,and 2) vesiculated melt. The fluffy C-rich texture is composed oflow-densitydeposits distributed across the surface of the sample(Fig. 2A). Analysis of a FIB section extracted from a low-density C-rich region in sample SC-001 reveals multiple globule-type deposits, discrete from stacked graphite, likely produced via melting from the laser irradiation [9].The vesiculated melt textureis smooth and uniformly distributed across isolated regions of the sample surface. The vesicles measure up to 100s of nmin diameter. Analysis of a FIB section from this texture was extracted from sample F-T-004 reveals a layer of amorphous melt material, close to 100 nm thick and uniform across the FIB section (Fig. 2B). Isolated regions of this melt layer contain small nanoparticles, <5 nm in diameter. Chemical analysis through energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy reveals the composition of this layer is enriched in Si and depleted in Mg and O compared to the underlying sample. Implications for Space Weathering on Mercury: Previous experiments simulating space weathering of Mercury have showndarkening and reddening of spectra[7,10].However, our use of low-Fe materials and graphite to create a sample set more analogous to the mercurian surface. Our results indicate that sample composition plays a significant and important role in the space weathering of Mercury. In particular, our spectral data demonstrates a strong correlation between spectral slope, Fe content, and simulated space weathering. While the variation in FeO content between samples F-S-002 and F-T-004 is <0.6 wt.%, the spectra deviate from flat to strongly red-sloped(F-T-004). This reddeningmay be linked to the presence of very small nanoparticles observed in the melt textures extracted from sample F-T-004. For the SC-001 sample, the fluffy C-rich textures may be developed by the amalgamation of small graphite particles into these unique morphologies. Such observations indicate that space weathering on Mercury may result in both familiar and new microstructural and chemical characteristics. References: [1]Hapke B. (2001) J. Geophys. Res.-Planet.,106,10039–10073. [2]Pieters C.M. and Noble S.K. (2016) J. Geophys. Res-Planet., 121, 1865–1884. [3] Lucey P.G., and Riner, M.A. (2011) Icarus,212, 451-462.[4]CintalaM.J.(1992)J. Geophys. Res.-Planet.,97,947–973.[5]Klima R.L.et al.(2018)Geophys.Res.Letters, 45, 2945–2953. [6]Nittler L.R., et al. (2011) Science 333, 1847-1850.[7]Sasaki S. and Kurahashi E. (2004) Space weathering on Mercury, Adv.Space Res., 33, 2152-2155.[8] Vander KaadenK.E., et al. (2018) LPSCXLIX, Abstract 1230. [9] McGlaun M.L. et al. (2019) LPSCL, Abstract 2019. [10] TrangD.et al. (2018)LPSCXLIX,Abstract2083

M S Thompson↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Space Sustainability Strategy: An Overview and a Conceptual Framework for Implementation

Space sustainability is crucial for the continuation of humanity's exploration and utilization of space. NASA recognizes the imperative of maintaining a sustainable space operating environment to safeguard the future of space activities. On April 9, 2024, NASA released its first part of an integrated Space Sustainability Strategy focused on the domain of earth orbit, with future volumes to address impacts of space operations on earth itself; cislunar space, including the Lagrange points and the lunar surface; and deep space, including other celestial bodies. This commitment extends to ensuring the safety of astronauts conducting operations in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), as well as enabling missions to the Moon and Mars. Moreover, sustainable space practices are essential for the uninterrupted operation of NASA's robotic science missions, which monitor Earth's changes and probe the mysteries of the universe. The strategy sets out a set of goals, the first of which is to establish a framework for assessing space sustainability at NASA, addressing the absence of a universally accepted framework with key metrics that promotes understanding of how metrics are interconnected. This framework will provide a basis for evaluating the sustainability of orbital activities, with metrics informed by input from the domestic and international space community. Objectives under this goal include defining key parameters affecting space sustainability, determining tolerable levels of risk, and annually publishing NASA's effect on space sustainability, including compliance with orbital debris mitigation standards. The subsequent goals build upon this foundation, identifying effective actions for enhancing space sustainability, incentivizing adoption of these actions through technology development and policy changes, and ensuring coordination with the global space community. An organizational change within NASA is also proposed to facilitate day-to-day coordination and accountability for space sustainability efforts. By pursuing these goals, NASA aims to strengthen the technical foundations of and continue to set an example for sustainable space operations. Regular evaluation of NASA mission performance in context with meeting sustainability objectives will ensure alignment with evolving challenges in the space operating environment.

Matt Forsbacka↗