lunar simulants, analogues, and standards. taxonomy for... · lunar simulants, analogues, and...
TRANSCRIPT
Lunar Simulants, Analogues, and Standards: Taxonomy, Needs and Realities for Mission Technologies
Development
Laurent Sibille, Ph.D.
ESC - Team QNA Surface Systems Group / SwampWorks
NASA Kennedy Space Center, FL
Off-Earth Mining Forum Sydney, Australia February 21, 2013
Team We want to go places in space…
Because our civilization is bound to leave its planet …
Team Dealing with dirt (regolith)
3
Landing somewhere means dealing with the surface in the planet’s environment…
Regolith is a soil typically void of organic matter
Rocks
What is the big deal? Just land on it… We are very familiar with terrestrial dirt and dealing with it
Our familiarity comes from having the right tools, technologies and techniques so it is not a big deal here on Earth
Team Dealing with regolith
Create technologies adapted to surface and sub-surface materials
Different geology
Different environments that create different regolith
Our success in planetary operations will come from having the same familiarity with regolith and rocks through … simulants and analogues.
Team In-Situ Resource Utilization Changes How We Explore Space
Risk Reduction & Flexibility
Expands Human Presence
Cost Reduction Mass Reduction
Enables Space Commercialization
Space Resource Utilization
• Allows reuse of transportation assets • Reduces number and size of Earth
launch vehicles • Minimizes DDT&E & operation costs
thru use of common technologies
• Increases Surface Mobility & extends missions
• Habitat & infrastructure construction
• Propellants, life support, power, etc.
• Substitutes propellant & consumable mass for new science or infrastructure cargo
• Provides infrastructure, technologies, and market to support space commercialization
• Propellant/consumable depots at Earth-Moon L1 & Surface for Human exploration & commercial activities
• >7.5:1 mass savings leverage from Moon/Mars surface back to Low Earth Orbit
• Reduces Lunar mission launch mass by 27 to 88% depending on reusability and propellant depot options
• Provides ‘safe haven’ capabilities for aborts and delayed cargo resupply
• Can reduce number of launches and mission operations
• Radiation and landing/ascent plume shielding
• Increases flexibility and options for contingency and failure recovery operations
• Reduces dependence on Earth
Team Space ‘Mining’ Cycle & Integration
with Surface/Transportation Elements
Communication & Autonomy
0
Crushing/Sizing/ Beneficiation
Global Resource Identification
Processing
Local Resource Exploration/Planning
Waste
Mining
Product Storage & Utilization
Site Preparation
Remediation
Propulsion
Power
Life Support & EVA
Depots
Science Involvement
Maintenance & Repair
Team What is In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU)?
Resource Characterization and Mapping Physical, mineral/chemical, and volatile/water
Mission Consumable Production Propellants, life support gases, fuel cell reactants, etc.
Civil Engineering & Surface Construction Radiation shields, landing pads, roads, habitats, etc.
In-Situ Energy Generation, Storage & Transfer Solar, electrical, thermal, chemical
In-Situ Manufacturing & Repair Spare parts, wires, trusses, integrated structures, etc.
ISRU involves any hardware or operation that harnesses and utilizes ‘in-situ’ resources to create products and services
for robotic and human exploration
Five Major Areas of ISRU
Team Key Facts of Life for In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU)
ISRU is a capability involving multiple technical discipline elements (mobility, regolith manipulation, regolith processing, reagent processing, product storage & delivery, power, manufacturing, etc.)
– Need to coordinate development and integration of end-to-end ISRU capabilities across multiple teams and international partners
ISRU does not exist on its own. By definition it must connect and tie to multiple users and systems to utilize the ISRU capabilities and products.
– Need to convince ‘customers’ that products and services will be possible, on-time, and with desired quality
ISRU has never flown on a mission. Mission managers and architecture planners will not incorporate ISRU in any significant manner until proven
– Need to show that ISRU can accomplish mission while meeting mass, power, volume, and life expectations and reducing mass and cost compared to bringing everything from Earth
Definition: In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) involves any hardware or operation that utilizes and processes natural lunar resources and/or discarded materials to create products and services
Team International Lunar Surface Operation – ISRU Analog Field Test
January 2010
Electrical Power
Solar Power
Excavation & Back-blading
Tephra Delivery & Removal
H2 H2 O2
H2O
Thruster Firing
CH4 (K-bottle)
Remote Ops & Satellite Communications
Solar Concentrator
X-Y-Z Table
Resistive Sintering on Rover
Command
Sintered Pad
Pneumatic Regolith Transfer Carbothermal
Reduction Reactor
Load-Haul-Dump Rover
Fuel Cell
O2 (Air) H2 Hydride Storage
Water Electrolysis & GO2 Storage
LO2/CH4 Storage & Thruster
Resource Characterization
3 DoF Blade on Rover
Landing Pad Construction
Hydrogen 80-250 psig
320 g/hr
Hydrogen 5-150 psig 17 g/hr
Hydrogen 25-150 psig 3 g/hr
H2
Water 5-25 psig 200 g/day
Oxygen 5-175 psig 164 g/hr
GPR
Geo Tech
MMI/Terra
Mossbauer
RESOLVE
Mole VAPoR
Purpose: 1. Demonstrate All Phases of Space Resource Utilization Operation Cycle 2. Begin integration of ISRU with other Surface System elements 3. Incorporate International Space Agency Hardware & Ops in Critical Roles
Sci
ence
Team
The type of interaction with the regolith places the subsystems in categories:
Remote interaction: sensing, mapping, imagery, telemetry
Descent plume exposure: descent engine, structures, landed equipment nearby
Mobility assets: direct and prolonged contact with surface regolith, rocks – wheels, tracks, Space suits
Regolith excavation, drilling & handing: sample tools, drills, rakes, blades, excavators, crushers, cyclones, sorters, hoppers
Processing reactors for ISRU: phase changes, volatile evolution, chemical agents reacting with regolith
Developing mission technologies in relevant materials and environments
Team
Needs for remote prospecting/sensing & descent stages optical properties, compositional ranges (mineralogy and chemical), particle distribution and shapes (secondary) and environmental characteristics (vacuum, solar illumination flux density,)
Needs of the surface mobility vehicles − Physical and geotechnical − particle distribution, shapes, mineralogy
Needs of the regolith handling hardware − same plus density, stratification, geology, rock formation
Needs of the regolith processing hardware − Mineralogical and chemical (melting point), environmental − But also…physical as well (example of RESOLVE devpt – fluidization,
interfaces with the crusher)
Simulant needs of the technology projects
Team
Start with our knowledge of the Moon
Apollo and Luna samples data
Apollo surface observations and measurements
Identify what features are mineralogical in nature and those that are due to formation processes specific to the Moon
Mineralogical features can be reproduced with some exceptions
Formation processes are more challenging or even impossible to reproduce
− Metoritic impacts, solar ions implantations
− Photoelectric-induced charging
− Pyroclastic glasses
Designing requirements for ‘special dirt’… what approach to choose?
Team
13
Excerpt from Sibille et al. “Lunar Regolith Simulant Materials: Recommendations for Standardization, Production, and Usage”, NASA TP-2006-214605
Team
The needs of the various technology development areas overlap Physical features like grain size, shape and bulk density are important to
all Modal composition is critical to guarantee that simulants can be used by
many users
Some needs are overriding Chemical compositions can be controlled by proper choice of terrestrial
minerals but source locations are very important
Choosing the mineralogy of the simulant becomes a top priority to simulate the right geotechnical properties and control the chemical composition for chemical processing
Approach to requirements
Team
Simulant materials can be classified by the type of regolith they simulate
• Mare materials
• Highland materials
• Special glass materials (e.g., pyroclastic)
Another classification arise by type of technology development
• Excavation, drilling and transport (BP-1, OB-1, Chenobi, LHT-NU-series)
• Simulants developed to reproduce physical properties mainly: shape, density, hardness, glass fraction, particle size distributions
• These simulants are not necessarily high fidelity in mineralogy and chemistry
• Chemical processing (JSC1-A, LHT-NU-series)
• Simulants developed to reproduce mineralogical and chemical compositions as well as some physical properties: major and minor components, inclusion of nanophase iron.
• These simulants tend to reflect higher fidelity in their versions
15
Classification of lunar simulants
Team
A focus on lunar highlands is a good place to start:
• The highlands represent 75% of the lunar surface
• The regolith possesses a remarkable physical uniformity throughout the lunar surface
• What mineralogy to choose?
• Fewer returned samples represent the Highlands
• Norite is a dominant component
• Ranking of needs is important to identify the economics of simulant materials and their level of fidelity (Figures of Merit)
Lunar Highlands Regolith Simulants
Team
The mineralogical variety of the Highlands is not tightly bound
Choices must be made to avoid trying to duplicate every sample known
Representation of several critical minerals and lithic components is needed to control both the physical properties and the chemical composition
Current approach by NASA is to identify simulant materials from different sources and provide an evaluation tool based on figures of merit (FoM)
Lunar Highlands Regolith Simulants
Team
A Figure of Merit is a comparison between: 2 actual materials (one could be a reference like a lunar sample)
Major material attributes (or measurements): dictate functionality Particle type/composition (Modal composition)
Particle size distribution
Particle shape distribution Bulk density
Environmental & engineering requirements Variability of feedstocks, repeatability of processes
Grinding, milling, mixing procedures; Compaction procedures
Storage protocols
Figures of Merit Approach
C. Schrader, D. Rickman: NASA/TM–2010–216443
Team Current lunar simulant materials (U.S.)
Simulant Info Type Contact�InfoUnited�States:
ALS�Arizona�Lunar�Simulant�Desai�et�al.,�1993 LowͲTi�Mare�(geotechnical)
BPͲ1
KSC�/�Arizona�Black�Point�quarry�waste�(Basalt)�;�using�for�large�excavation�exercises�with�BLADERahmatian�&�Metzger,�in�press LowͲTi�mare�(geotechnical) Rob�Mueller/KSC
CSMͲCL�Colorado�School�of�Mines�–�Colorado�Lava�Unpublished geotechnical
GCAͲ1�Goddard�Space�Center��Taylor�et�al.,�2008 LowͲTi�mare�(geotechnical)
GRCͲ1�&�Ͳ3�
Glenn�Research�Center��(Sand,�clay�mixture�used�in�SLOPE�Facility�for�mobility/excavation)Oravec�et�al.,�in�press
Geotechnical:�standard�vehicle�mobility�lunar�simulant Allen�Wilkinson/GRC
GSCͲ1Goddard�“Simulant”;�material�from�local�site�that�is�being�used�for�drilling�tests��� Peter�Chen/GSFC
JSCͲ1*Johnson�Space�Center�McKay�et�al.,�1994 LowͲTi�mare�(general�use) no�longer�available
LowͲTi�mare�(general�use)
JSCͲ1A�,�Ͳ1AF,�Ͳ1AC Orbitec�created�under�a�NASA�contract�.�
(JSCͲ1A�was�produced�from�the�same�source�material�after�a�gap�of�some�years�when�JSCͲ1�ran�out) http://orbitec.com/store/simulant.html
MKSͲ1� Carpenter,�2005LowͲTi�mare�(intended�use�unknown)
MLSͲ1*Minnesota�Lunar�SimulantWeiblen�et�al.,�1990 HighͲIlmenite�mare�(general�use) no�longer�available�(created�in�the�1980s)
MLSͲ1P*� Weiblen�et�al.,�1990
HighͲTi�mare�(experimental,�not�produced�in�bulk�although�small�quanitites�were�distributed)
MLSͲ2*� Tucker�et�al.,�1992 Highlands�(general�use)
NUͲLHT�Ͳ�1M,�Ͳ2M,�Ͳ1D,�Ͳ2C
NASA/USGS�Highland�Type�Simulant�(Chemical/Mineralogical�&�Physical�Properties)Stoeser�et�al.,�2009 Highlands�(general�use)
Carole�McLemore�256Ͳ544Ͳ2314�[email protected]��http://isru.msfc.nasa.gov����
Others
Team Current lunar simulant materials (International)
CASͲ1
China�(Chinese�Academy�of�Sciences)a�basaltic�simulant�made�to�represent�Apollo�14�Zheng�et�al.,�2008 LowͲTi�mare�(general�use)
CLRSͲ1�Chinese�Lunar�Regolith�Simulant�Chinese�Academy�of�Sciences,�2009 LowͲTi�mare�(general�use?)
CLRSͲ2� Chinese�Academy�of�Sciences,�2009 HighͲTi�mare�(general�use?)
CUGͲ1China
He�et�al.,�2010 LowͲTi�mare�(geotechnical) presentation�at�LPSC�2010�conference
NAOͲ1
NAOͲ1,�National�Astronomical�Observatories,�Chinese�Academy�of�Sciences�Li�et�al.,�2009 Highlands�(general�use)
TJͲ1�,�TJͲ2
China�(Tongji�University)�;�a�basaltic�ash�feedstock�with�olivine�and�glassJiang�et�al.,�in�press
LowͲTi�mare
(geotechnical)�
presentation�at�Earth�&��Space�2010:�Jiang�M.J.,�Liqing�Li,�Chuang�Wang,�He�Zhang,�A�New�Lunar�Soil�Simulant�in�China,�in�press,�Earth&Space,�2010�the�12th�Biennial�International�Conference�on�Engineering,Science,Construction�and�Operations�in�Challenging�Environments.
CHENOBI
Canada�(Physical�&�Chemical�properties�simulant) Highlands�(geotechnical) http://www.evcltd.com/index_005.htm���Canada Jim Richard
International:
OBͲ1
Canada
OlivineͲBytownite�Battler�&�Spray,�2009 Highlands�(general�use�geotechnical)
Jim�Richard�PH:�705Ͳ521Ͳ8324�x205�/��[email protected]���http://www.norcat.org/innovationͲregolith.aspx�
FJSͲ1�(type�1)�FJSͲ1�(type�2)FJSͲ1�(type�3)
Fuji�Japanese�Simulant
Kanamori�et�al.,�1998
LowͲTi�mare�LowͲTi�mare
HighͲTi�mare
(general�use) http://www.shimz.co.jp/english/index.html���Oshima�base�simulant� Sueyoshi�et�al.,�2008 HighͲTi�mare�(general�use)
Kohyama�base�simulant� Sueyoshi�et�al.,�2008Intermediate�between�highlands�and�mare�(general�use)
KOHLSͲ1
Korea
Koh�Lunar�Simulant�Jiang�et�al.�2010 LowͲTi�mare�(geotechnical)
presentation�at�Earth�&��Space�2010:�Experimental�Study�of�Waterless�Concrete�for�Lunar�Construction�by�Sung�Won�Koh,�Jaemin�Yoo,�Leonhard�Bernold,�and�Tai�Sik�Lee,�Hanyang�University,�Korea.��
Others�Ͳ�This�may�not�be�a�complete�listing.�
Team
Should everybody use the same simulant materials?
Question is almost irrelevant since current development takes place using what people can procure and afford. If you are interested in comparing your hardware with other benchmarks, then yes.
Should different simulants be used at different stages of development?
Yes. Again it is happening because of costs.
Mission hardware development is based on reducing risks: the simulant selected are part of the risk definition by experimental “decision gates”.
CAUTION: sometimes, an agency or even a political schedule will limit the number of tests or the length of particular development phases. THIS MEANS: the scientist / engineer must design these tests to cover as many risk areas as possible use of Modern Design of Experiment (MDoE) here can be an advantage – not used often enough)
Can the use of the proper simulant and analogues retire all the risks?
No, but it goes a long way.
21
Challenges and decisions
Team Why Perform Analog Field Tests
Concrete Benefits of Field/Analog Testing Mature Technology Forces design decisions to be made and gets hardware out of the laboratory Develops technologies and systems at relevant scale and initiates packaging & integration
Evaluate Space Architecture Concepts Under Applicable Conditions Demonstrate feasibility for ISRU to provide Outpost with oxygen at relevant processing rates/scales Demonstrates use of modular units for interconnection and growth Demonstrates feasibility of multiple science instruments on mobile platform for lunar volatile/ISRU precursor
mission
Evaluate Operations & Procedures Evaluate operations, controls, and interactions required for end-to-end oxygen extraction Evaluate operations, controls, and interactions required for mobile science and ISRU precursor Evaluate remote operations and communications impacts on hardware and performance Evaluate science vs engineering aspect to instrument data and operations
Integrate and Test Hardware from Multiple Organizations & Partners
Team Why Perform Analog Field Tests
Intrinsic Benefits of Field/Analog Testing Develop Partnerships
Develop Teams and Trust Early
Develop Data Exchange & Interactions with International Partners (ITAR)
Outreach and Public Education JSC “ROxygen” System
Lockheed Martin O2 System: PILOT RESOLVE: Resource
Prospector and O2 Demonstration System
• “Cratos” Excavator • ROxygen H2
Reduction Reactor –Fluidized/Auger
• Water Electrolysis – Anode-Feed
• Bucket-drum Excavator
• PILOT H2 Reduction Reactor – Rotating
• Water Electrolysis – Cathode-Feed
• GO2/LO2 Storage
• “Scarab” Mobile Platform • RESOLVE Drill, Crusher, and Volatile/
H2 Reduction • TriDAR Navigation & Vision Camera • Satellite Link & Remote Ops
Team
Resource Characterization & Mapping Lunar polar ice/volatile characterization
− RESOLVE
In-Situ Energy Generation, Storage & Transfer
– Solar Concentrators – Heat Pipes
Civil Engineering & Surface Construction
– Lunar Regolith Excavation – Lunar Regolith and Mars Soil Transfer – Lunar Regolith Size Sorting &
Beneficiation – Lunar Regolith Simulant Production – Surface Preparation
NASA Development of Lunar and Mars ISRU Technologies & Systems: 2005-2012
Mission Consumable Production • Oxygen Extraction from Regolith
Hydrogen Reduction Carbothermal Reduction Molten Oxide Electrolysis Ionic Liquids
• Oxygen and Fuel from Mars Atmosphere Carbon Dioxide Capture Mars Soil Drying Microchannel Reactors
• Water and Fuel from Trash Steam Reforming Combustion/Pyrolysis
• Water Processing Water Electrolysis Water Cleanup
Relevant Test Environment
Craters with varied slopes & rocks
Lunar-Like Terrain & Soil
Mauna Kea - Local Infrastructure (Hale Pohaku)
Sleeping Quarters
Visitor’s Center
Planning/Debriefing Room
Dining/Cafeteria Room Bunk Rooms
Bed Rooms
To Field Test Location
Residence Lobby
Vehicle Shops
Team
LESSONS LEARNED
Team 2008 Field Test Lessons Learned (examples)
Environment Lessons Dust caused problems with unsealed electronics. (We ultimately improvised
with dust filter from local stores Cratos excavator failed twice due to dust and wear: electronics (recovered) and motor/
gear (not recovered)
Drill electronics failed several times due to shorts and had to be cleaned out overnight before returning to operation
Temperature and humidity cycling pointed out weak points in the design (Reinforces the need to “get out of the lab)
Cold solder joints, Cycling on wire connectors caused physical changes resulting in unexpected electrical failures
Wind impacted simulated ‘lunar’ operation Wind did not allow for accurate measurement of quantities of soil loaded and spent soil
expelled
Wind likely reduced the amount of water produced and collected due to cooling
Didn’t anticipate overnight freezing temperatures. Thermal blankets and power needed. Have to think of all weather contingencies in the future
Impact on personnel worse then expected: sun burns, dry/dusty eyes, cracked skin, etc.
Having Doctor on site was extremely useful.
Team
Team 2008 Field Test Lessons Learned (examples)
Local Material (Tephra) Local material behaved differently simulations in the laboratory Bucketdrum Excavator did not successfully traverse and delivery regolith to lift
system due to rover unable to operate on local material Higher torque loads caused several hardware failures during PILOT operations. (All
failures were fixed in the field and testing proceeded) − Having good set of tools and spare parts is a must
General Lessons Learned Hard date of analog test good for forcing designs off the drawing board and
decisions to be made. Test operations required to be flexible to handle day-to-day changes Having lodging and facilities near test site & in Hilo was extremely helpful;
especially for early starts and nighttime operations Lunch scheduling was impacted by Astronomer activities, leading to a hungry and
grumpy test team. Large variation in slopes and rock distributions in compact area with relevant
physical/mineral material was excellent for testing
Roads to test site degraded over time with use. Need to limit traffic
Team Analog and Field Test Site Infrastructure Needs
Relevant Test Environment
Soil
Terrain
Rock distributions
Access
Easy access by all participants and hardware by government, industry, academia, and international space agencies
Access and operations day and night if required
Access to site for ~14 days per test program
Security to control access of non-participants and secure hardware
Personnel Support
Lodging and food near test site for test personnel to minimize travel time and logistics to/from test site
Personal hygiene facilities and refreshment/food capability at test sites or within reasonable distance so testing is not impacted
On-site medical support for first aid & emergencies with rapid access to near-by hospital if required (< 1 hour)
Meeting areas for planning and post-test debrief
Parking
Team
Requirements on a few main properties of the regolith can be defined to drive simulant development
Production of the resulting simulants will be economically feasible while
maintaining quality control
Adopt a concept that enables quick response to changing knowledge and
implementation of that knowledge between simulant batches (FoM helps)
Merge the functionality of simulants into the analogue environment
Standard simulant materials should continue to be made but used at
the right time in development of technologies
Conclusions
Team
Everybody does not use the same simulant materials
Comparing your hardware with other benchmarks will determine the choice.
Different simulants are used at different stages of development
The scientist / engineer must design these tests to cover as many risk areas as possible use of Modern Design of Experiment here can be an advantage – not used often enough)
Can simulants and analogues be integrated?
Difficult but should be attempted
Acknowledgements
J. Sanders (JSC), W. Larson (KSC), PISCES, The RESOLVE team, D. Rickman & C. Schrader (MSFC), SwampWorks and GMRO Lab (KSC)
35
Conclusions / Challenges