National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Planetary Science Context for EVA

EVA Exploration Workshop Kelsey Young, Exploration Scientist | Trevor Graff, Exploration Scientist February 2020 Scientific Drivers for Planetary Exploration

LRO: NASA GSFC Conceptual Images Lab MSL: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS OSIRIS-REX: NASA/Univ. AZ/Lockheed Martin • Massive advancements made since surface missions, but there are still a number of outstanding science questions across all potential targets of interest for human exploration • Areas of interest include geology, geophysics, geochemistry, atmospheres, life-related chemistry, etc. – Varying levels of human interaction – Astrobiology: Planetary Protection Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO)

Image 400m across Apollo 17 Landing Site Apollo 16 S-IVB LRO Traverse Planning NASA/GSFC/ASU NASA/GSFC/ASU Speyerer et al., 2016 • Jointly funded by ESMD/SMD • Initially operated to select landing sites for future crewed missions before being transferred for science operations • LRO Instrumentation: – CRaTER (Cosmic Ray Telescope for the Effects of Radiation) – DLRE (Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment) – LAMP (Lyman-Alpha Mapping Project) – LEND (Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector) – LROC (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera) – LOLA (Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter) Launched: 18 JUNE 2009 – Mini-RF (Miniature Radio Frequency) Science Enabling Exploration

• LRO entering 4th extended mission and 10th year in lunar orbit • Fuel for 7 more years • Global topography at 60 m/pixel • Global coverage at 100 m/pixel • Localized topography at 2.5m/px for 4% of • Global temperature data • Illumination maps of entire surface

Dewar Cryptomaria Lunar Interior, Farside Volcanism New Advances in Lunar Science LRO Tour of the Moon in 4K

• 5-minute animation that takes the viewer on a virtual tour of our nearest neighbor in space. • The tour has been recreated in eye-popping 4K resolution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr5Pj6GQL2o&feature=youtu.be COMMUNITY STRUCTURE, STRATEGIC KNOWLEDGE GAPS, AND DRIVING DOCS Planetary Science Analysis Groups

• Analysis Groups – Organization of science sub communities into different groups based on subject area – AGs identify how far we’ve come, where we’re going, and develop and maintain outstanding science questions

• MEPAG - Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group • LEAG - Lunar Exploration Analysis Group • SBAG - Small Bodies Analysis Group • CAPTEM - Curation and Analysis Planning Team for Extraterrestrial Materials • OPAG - Outer Planets Assessment Group • VEXAG - Venus Exploration Analysis Group LEAG Executive Committee

Samuel Lawrence Chair NASA Johnson Space Center Brett Denevi Vice-Chair Johns Hopkins University APL Barbara Cohen Vice-Chair NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Clive Neal Emeritus Chair University of Notre Dame Amy Fagan LEAG Operations Chair Western Carolina University Ryan Watkins Workforce Development Chair Planetary Science Institute Kurt Klaus Commercial Chair Lunar and Planetary Institute Jerry Sanders Lunar Resources NASA Johnson Space Center Kelsey Young Lunar Surface Exploration NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Louise Prockter LPI Director Lunar and Planetary Institute Jasper Halekas ARTEMIS Representative University of Iowa Noah Petro LRO Representative NASA Goddard Space Flight Center James ESA Representative European Space Agency Greg Schmidt SSERVI Director NASA Ames Research Center Jacob Bleacher Ex Officio NASA-HEOMD Sarah Noble Ex Officio NASA-SMD Andrew Petro Ex Officio NASA STMD Strategic Knowledge Gaps

• After major outstanding questions are decided, the AGs compile Strategic Knowledge Gaps (SKGs) to direct future activities and identify areas for growth

• Strategic Action Teams (SATs) are then assembled to address specific SKGs – Ex: SAT on Geoscience Astronaut Training

• AGs with overlap into human exploration destinations (MEPAG, LEAG, SBAG) integrate exploration objectives into their charters

• AG Executive Council membership pulls from government, industry, and academia – Each AG has annual or bi-annual meetings open to all SKGs for the “Moon First” Human Exploration Scenario (LEAG SAT) Lunar Science/Exploration Guiding Documents

Scientific Context for the Vision and Voyages for Planetary Lunar Exploration Roadmap Advancing Science of the Moon: Exploration of the Moon (SCEM) Science in the Decade 2013-2022 (current version 1.3) Report of the Specific Action Team

2007 2009 2016 2017 . National Research Council . National Research Council . Lunar Exploration Analysis Group . LEAG Specific Action Team Report . Defines 8 prioritized science concepts . Identifies key questions facing (LEAG) . Chartered to evaluation the progress and associated science goals planetary science and outlines . A living/updated document towards achieving the goals of the . 4 Overarching Themes: 1) Terrestrial recommendations for exploration . Intended to layout an integrated & 2007 SCEM Report Planet Differentiation, 2) Earth/Moon . Lunar components include Lunar sustainable plan for lunar exploration . Reviewed the 8 original SCEM System, 3) Lunar Environment, 4) South Pole-Aitken Basin Sample . 3 Themes: 1) Science, 2) Feed concepts while adding 3 new Solar System Impact Record Return & Lunar Geophysical Network Forward, 3) Sustainability concepts Lunar Scientific Concepts The SCEM study identified eight areas of scientific research that should be addressed by future lunar exploration. Within each concept was a list of 35 prioritized science goals (Table 5.1). The science concepts were defined as follows: • S.1 The bombardment history of the inner Solar System is uniquely revealed on the Moon. • S.2 The structure and composition of the lunar interior provide fundamental information on the evolution of a differentiated planetary body. • S.3 Key planetary processes are manifested in the diversity of lunar crustal rocks. • S.4 The lunar poles are special environments that may bear witness to the volatile flux over the latter part of solar system history. • S.5 Lunar volcanism provides a window into the thermal and compositional evolution of the Moon. • S.6 The Moon is an accessible laboratory for studying the impact process on planetary scales. • S.7 The Moon is a natural laboratory for regolith processes and weathering on anhydrous airless bodies. • S.8 Processes involved with the atmosphere and dust environment of the Moon are accessible for scientific study while the environment remains in a pristine state.

In addition to evaluating the progress made to achieving the 8 scientific concepts of the SCEM report, the ASM-SAT also added three new concepts: • A.1 The Lunar Water Cycle: while the SCEM report included polar volatiles, work over the last decade has pointed to a water cycle with three principle components: primordial (interior) water, surficial water (linked to solar wind), and polar (sequestered) water. • A.2 The Origin of the Moon: clues to lunar origin and geologic processes that operated during planetary accretion are recorded in the lunar rock record. Focused sample studies and sample return could be used to unlock these mysteries and test long-standing origin hypotheses. • A.3 Lunar Tectonism and Seismicity: over the last decade, high-resolution imagery has led to a dramatic increase in the number of tectonic landforms present on the lunar surface, including wrinkle ridges, rilles, and lobate scarps. The interior structure, thermal history, and mechanism(s) of heat loss of a planet are all related to the resulting distribution of surface tectonism. Recent LEAG Reports & Workshops

LEAG has recently conducted several studies and workshops to prepare for lunar pivot Lunar South Pole Landing

Vice President Mike Pence at the 5th meeting of the National Space Council  “lunar South Pole holds great scientific, economic, and strategic value,”  “when the first American astronauts return to the lunar surface, that they will take their first steps on the Moon’s South Pole.” March 26th, 2019

HLS-R-0306 Surface Access - Initial  The HLS shall provide crew transfers to and from Lunar Orbit and a lunar landing site between 84°S and 90°S.

Polar Volatiles  High priority science & In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) target  Permanently Shadowed Regions (PSRs) contain compounds such as water ice that are not found elsewhere on the Moon, but which contain clues to the history of the inner Solar System water and other volatile elements Mazarico (2011) and Siegler (2016) Lunar South Pole Landing

3 km Lunar South Pole Materials

 Material at the SP may be Near Side Far Side most like Apollo 16 samples from the lunar highlands . Primarily breccias (rocks composed of fragments of other, older rocks) 15 17 . Anorthosite (rocks from the early lunar magma ocean) . Few basalts (from nearby large 12 14 11 impacts) 16 Lunar South Pole Materials

SP SP

NASA/JPL-Caltech/IPGP

Bulk density (kg/m3) of the lunar highlands generated using gravity data from GRAIL and topography data from LRO SSERVI - Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute

Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) is a virtual institute established to advance basic and applied lunar and planetary science research and to advance human exploration of the solar system through scientific discovery. Focus areas include: • The Moon, Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs), Phobos & Deimos • Origin and evolution of the inner Solar System • Planetary differentiation processes • Potential human destinations • Structure and composition • Regolith, dust and plasma interactions • Volatiles and other potential resources

sservi..gov SSERVI Mission

SSERVI fosters collaborations within and among competitively selected domestic teams, the broader exploration science community, and multiple international partners in order to:

1. Advance human exploration of the 2. Conduct cross-disciplinary research between the science 3. Provide scientific, technical, and mission- solar system through scientific and exploration communities defining analyses for relevant NASA discovery programs, planning, and space missions as requested by NASA

4. Explore innovative ways of using information technology for 5. Train the next generation of scientific collaboration and information dissemination across explorers and encourage global geographic boundaries public engagement SSERVI Teams

• Teams were selected from peer-reviewed proposals and are supported for five years through Cooperative Agreements • Central Node at NASA Ames and 12 teams spread across the country

CLASS - Center for Lunar and Asteroid Surface Science Dan Britt University of Central Florida ICE FIVE-O - Interdisciplinary Consortium for Evaluating Volatile Origins Jeffrey Gillis-Davis Washington University RISE2 - Remote, In Situ, and Synchrotron Studies for Science and Exploration 2 Timothy Glotch Stony Brook University in New York RESOURCE - Resource Exploration and Science of OUR Cosmic Environment Jennifer Heldmann NASA Ames IMPACT - Institute for Modeling Plasmas, Atmospheres, and Cosmic Dust Mihaly Horanyi University of Colorado Boulder LEADER - Lunar Environment And Dynamics for Exploration Research Rosemary Killen NASA Goddard CLSE - Center for Lunar Science and Exploration David Kring Lunar and Planetary Institute GEODES - Geophysical Exploration Of the Dynamics and Evolution of the Solar System Nicholas Schmerr University of Maryland College Park NESS - Network for Exploration and Space Science Jack Burns University of Colorado TREX - Toolbox for Research and Exploration Amanda Hendrix Planetary Science Institute REVEALS - Radiation Effects on Volatiles and Exploration of Asteroids and Lunar Surfaces Thomas Orlando Georgia Institute of Technology ESPRESSO - Exploration Science Pathfinder Research for Enhancing Solar System Observations Alex Parker Southwest Research Institute SSERVI Science & Exploration Topics Instruments to Fly on CLPS Deliveries

 NASA conducted two calls for instruments to fly on CLPS surface deliveries . Both were for near ready to fly experiments . NASA Provided Lunar Payloads (NPLP) was a NASA-internal call • 13 instruments selected • Mixture of science, technology & exploration • Flying on first two CLPS deliveries . Lunar Surface Instruments & Technology (LSITP) was to the external community • 12 instruments selected July 1, 2019 • Near-ready or ready-to-fly payloads • Open to science, technology and exploration type payloads  Future calls (internal & external combined) planned approximately annually . Goal is to head towards a PI-led science payload suite model . Opportunities for internationally provided payloads NASA Provided Lunar Payloads (NPLP) Instruments

Astrobotic Lander Intuitive Machines Lander

Surface Exosphere Linear Energy Transfer Lunar Node 1 Navigation Alterations by Landers Spectrometer (LETS) Demonstrator (LN-1) (SEAL)

Stereo Cameras for Lunar Photovoltac Investigation Neutron Spectrometer Plume-Surface Studies on Lunar Surface (PILS) System (NSS) (SCALPSS)

Low-frequency Radio Near-Infrared Volatile Neutron Measurements Observations from the Spectrometer System at the Lunar Surface Near Side Lunar Surface (NIRVSS) (NMLS) (ROLSES)

Mass Spectrometer Navigation Lidar Fluxgate Magnetometer Observing Lunar for Precise Velocity and (MAG) Operations (Msolo) Range Sensing (NDL)

PROSPECT Ion-Trap Mass Science Spectrometer for Lunar Surface Volatiles (PITMS) Technology KEY Exploration Lunar Surface Instrument and Technology Payload (LSITP) Instruments

Lunar Compact InfraRed Imaging System (L-CIRiS) University of Colorado Regolith Adherence Characterization Alpha Space Test & Research Alliance LLC Next Generation Lunar Retroreflectors University of Maryland SAMPLR: Sample Acquisition, Morphology Filtering, and Probing of Lunar Regolith MDA Information Systems Lunar Demonstration of a Reconfigurable, Radiation Tolerant Computer System Montana State University The Lunar Surface Electromagnetics Experiment (LuSEE) University of California, Berkeley MoonRanger: Flight-Forward Moon Rover with Exploration Autonomy Astrobotic Technology Inc. Lunar Environment heliophysics X-ray Imager (LEXI) Boston University PlanetVac: Sample Acquisition and Delivery System Honeybee Robotics Ltd. Heimdall: A flexible build-to-print camera system for conducting lunar science Planetary Science Institute Lunar Instrumentation for Subsurface Thermal Exploration with Rapidity (LISTER) Texas Tech University Lunar Magnetotelluric Sounder Southwest Research Institute STRATEGIES FOR CLOSING KNOWLEDGE GAPS Moving Into the Future Integrated Operational Testing for Space Exploration Who: Partners from NASA, Academia, Research, Industry, and DoD What: Development Across Key Areas Where: Testing Environments How: Integrated Operational Field Testing National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Lunar Surface Environment Drivers for EVA

EVA Exploration Workshop February, 2020

John Swatkowski, EVA Exploration Engineer EVA Strategic Integration Office NASA | The Aerospace Corporation xEVA System Sources for information on Environments

• Since January 2019, the xEVA System Environments Working Group, has been working to: • Distill environmental information into usable products for the EVA Community • Or identify a source where the information is adequately distilled • Provide an understanding of the environment for EVA • Address specific concerns presented by the EVA Community • Determine what environment activities are on-going around the agency that are relevant to EVA • Predominately the working group has consisted of members from the EVA Office, MSFC, and JSC XI with members pulled in from other centers overtime • The working group is not exclusive to any one center or organization • The Working Group covers LEO, cis-lunar, lunar surface and Mars, but has focused primarily on lunar surface This document does not contain any export control information xEVA System Sources for information on Environments

• EVA-EXP-0039: xEVA System Destination Environments Document (originally EVA-RD-003) was created to answer the question of what environments would be relevant to an xEVA System hardware provider (space suit, tools) • Baseline released in Dec 2017 • Rev A planned to be released in Q1 of 2020 with updates focused on the lunar surface section

• With respect to SLS-SPEC-159, Cross Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE), EVA- EXP-0039: – Points to it as needed – Provides context for an SLS-SPEC-159 environment’s relevancy to xEVA – Tailors information and indicates relevant subset of the environment applicable to xEVA This document does not contain any export control information How the presentation is laid out

• South Pole Environment – What the expected environment is like for the lunar 2024 missions

• Apollo Experience – How did the environments Apollo experience compare to the environments expected to be seen on the lunar 2024 mission

• Driver for EVA – Statements on what is affected by this environment or possible way of addressing the environment – If an implementation or solution is indicated, it is just a suggestion and there may be multiple ways to address it

This document does not contain any export control information Terrain

• South Pole Environment • Slopes typically of 5-6 degrees with some excursions up steeper slopes between 6 and 20 degrees • Steeper slopes will be driven by science point of interest (Permanently shadowed regions (PSR, lava tubes) • Rock distribution can reach 10-20% of surface, but is rare. • Rocks are ejecta of fresh craters, the interior of sizable and/or fresh craters, and on or beneath other steep slopes • Apollo Experience • Terrain will be similar to highlands in Apollo 16 • There is the possibility of extended periods of steeper slopes then Apollo • Driver for EVA • Suit mobility • MET rates • EVA Support Aids

This document does not contain any export control information Terrain

20m/px 16°↓ NOTE: The “+” represents a notional location to 18°↓ make measurements from. An actual landing site ～12.0 km on the rim may be different. Distances shown are point-to-point distances. Actual traverse distance ～ 12.0 km 7°↓ will be ～ 1.5 – 2.0 times greater.

14°↓ ～4.6 km 13°↓ 32°↓ 16°↓ + 11°↓ ～11.2 km

4°↓

～5.8 km

19°↓

This document does not contain any export control information Illumination

• South Pole Environment • Landings will occur in areas that will be permanently lit for the duration of the mission • Low sun angle (<2 degrees) for entire duration of the mission • The expectation is low sun angles with long shadows • Science “areas of opportunities” may be collocated to landing sites but separated by temporarily shadowed areas, requiring traverse between shadow regions • Apollo Experience The three identified south-polar areas receiving the highest • Landed in equatorial regions in the early Lunar accumulated illumination (shown from 0 to 80%) at two meters morning and ended in late lunar morning, with sun above ground over the chosen twenty-year period. The areas of high average illumination (>70%) are shown as black pixels and angle varying between 7.5 and 50 degrees (Fassett, PSRs are shown as white pixels. (a) C1 at Connecting Ridge Zanetti, 2017) incorporates two clusters of high average illumination C1-0 and C1- • Driver for EVA 1. (b) C2 also contains two clusters C2-0 and C2-1. (c) At Shackleton crater rim three clusters with PSRs nearby can be identified. Map • Transitions from shadow to light regions axis units are in kilometers and map is displayed in gnomonic • Visibility and contrast in shadowed regions projection. (Gläser et al., 2018) This document does not contain any export control information Thermal

Surface • South Pole Environment Moon Earth Temperatures • The temperature of an object on the lunar surface is ~206 K (390 K at noon; ~299 K (303 K at noon; ~295 dependent upon the: Equator Average ~95 K at midnight) K at midnight) • Solar incidence (1378 W/m2 at 2 degrees) ~98 K (outside of ~256 K (North Pole); ~230 K Polar Average • Radiative lunar surface properties shadow) (South Pole) • Surface temperature ~184 K (Vostok Station, Minimum ~25 K (Hermite Crater) • Expecting ~100 – 275 K surface temps at Antarctica) ~410 K (small equatorial the landing sites Maximum ~331 K (El Azizia, Libya) • PSR are more challenging and can go as low craters) as 40K • Apollo Experience • Higher sun angles • Originally planned for surface temps of 116K to 395k • Only experienced a subset of those surface temps and never reached the upper temperature limits • Driver for EVA • Space suit materials • Thermal heaters • Operational constraints on EVA in extreme conditions

• EVA Duration/Traverses This document does not contain any export control information Plasma

• South Pole Environment • Due to terrain and orbital inclination of the moon, there are areas where plasma builds up • Due to limited exposure to sunlight the plasma doesn’t dissipate and results in high surface potentials • The main problem areas are night side and shadowed regions • No photoelectron currents, and have reduced plasma currents • Moving over the surface creates a tribo-electric source of charge, S(t) – Surface ‘ground’, but the Moon is a very poor conductor [Carrier et al., 1991] • Apollo Experience • On dayside, photoelectrons and solar wind ions provide a good ground. The medium is conductive. • Landing sites were in the equatorial region, so sunlight reduced surface potentials • Drivers for EVA • Materials to reduce charge build up on suit • Conductive path across suit • Support equipment for discharging Farrell et al, 2008 This document does not contain any export control information