DOCSLIB.ORG

Report of the 2018 Joint Mars Rover Mission Joint Science Working Group (JSWG)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Report of the 2018 Joint Mars Rover Mission Joint Science Working Group (JSWG) Report of the 2018 Joint Mars Rover Mission Joint Science Working Group (JSWG) Final Version 26 March 2012 Recommended bibliographic citation: MEPAG JSWG (2012) Report of the 2018 Joint Mars Rover Mission Joint Science Working Group (JWSG), 93 pp., posted March, 2012, by the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG) at http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/reports/. Or: Beaty, D.W., Kminek, G., Allwood, A.C., Arvidson, R., Borg, L.E., Farmer, J. D., Goesmann, F., Grant, J. A., Hauber, E., Murchie, S.L., Ori, G.G., Ruff, S. W., Rull, F., Sephton, M. A., Sherwood Lollar, B., Smith, C. L., Westall, F., Pacros, A.E., Wilson, M.G., Meyer, M.A., Vago, J.L., Bass, D.S., Joudrier, L., Laubach, S., Feldman, S., Trautner, R., Milkovich, S.M. (2012) Report of the 2018 Joint Mars Rover Mission Joint Science Working Group (JSWG), 93 pp., posted March, 2012, by the Mars Exploration Analysis Group (MEPAG) at http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/reports/. Inquiries regarding this report should be directed to David Beaty ( [email protected] , +1 714 818-354- 7968) or Gerhard Kminek ( [email protected] , +31 71 565 6096) (JSWG co-chairs). Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 4 List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................... 6 1. Background, assumptions, and deliverables ............................................................................................... 8 1.1. Assumptions .............................................................................................................................................. 8 1.2. Deliverables .............................................................................................................................................. 8 1.3. Notes Regarding this Report ..................................................................................................................... 8 2. Methods and Schedule ................................................................................................................................... 9 3. Scientific Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 11 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 11 3.2. Discussion of proposed scientific objectives .......................................................................................... 13 3.2.1. Precursor statement ......................................................................................................................... 13 3.2.2. Objective 1 ...................................................................................................................................... 13 3.2.3. Objective 2 ...................................................................................................................................... 14 3.2.4. Objective 3 ...................................................................................................................................... 15 3.2.5. Objective 4: ..................................................................................................................................... 16 4. Implementation Strategies to Achieve Objectives .................................................................................... 17 5. Achieving a Scientifically Compelling Landing Site ................................................................................. 20 5.1. Landing site elevation ............................................................................................................................. 20 5.2. Landing site latitude ............................................................................................................................... 22 5.2.1. Importance of Northern vs. Southern Latitude Terrain for Candidate Landing Sites ..................... 23 5.3. The importance of “go-to” landing sites ................................................................................................ 24 5.4. Landing Site Selection Process ............................................................................................................... 26 6. Scientific Instruments .................................................................................................................................. 26 6.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 26 6.2. Summary of Pasteur Payload (PPL) Instruments ................................................................................... 27 6.2.1. Externally-mounted instruments ..................................................................................................... 27 6.2.2. Instruments in the Analytical Laboratory Drawer (ALD) ............................................................... 28 6.3. New instruments to be competed ............................................................................................................ 30 6.3.1. Mast-mounted imaging instrument ................................................................................................. 32 6.3.2. Competed mast-mounted instrument ............................................................................................... 32 6.3.3. Competed close-up instruments ...................................................................................................... 33 6.3.4. Candidate instruments options (“example instrument payload”) .................................................... 34 6.4. Scientific Instruments infographics ........................................................................................................ 35 7. Science Support Hardware ......................................................................................................................... 36 7.1. Mast ........................................................................................................................................................ 37 7.2. The ExoMars Drill .................................................................................................................................. 38 7.3. Robotic Arm ............................................................................................................................................ 39 7.4. Sample Acquisition and Caching System ................................................................................................ 40 7.5. Surface Preparation Tool ....................................................................................................................... 43 7.6. Analytical Laboratory Drawer (ALD) and Sample Preparation and Distribution System (SPDS) ....... 44 7.7. Science Support Environment ................................................................................................................. 45 7.7.1. Contamination control ..................................................................................................................... 45 7.7.2. Blanks .............................................................................................................................................. 46 7.7.3. Cross-contamination ........................................................................................................................ 47 8. Quantitative aspects of the mission implementation—how many? ......................................................... 47 ii 9. The scientific importance of using organic geochemistry information in selecting samples for the sample cache ........................................................................................................................................................ 49 10. The scientific importance of including a sample from the deep subsurface in the sample cache ...... 50 11. Reference Surface Mission Operations Scenario, and Implications for Minimum Mission Lifetime 52 11.1. Maximizing science return within 1 Martian year (669 sols) ................................................................. 52 11.2. Two Operational Centers ........................................................................................................................ 53 11.3. Looking at a Three-season rover ............................................................................................................ 54 12. Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 57 12.1. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................. 57 12.2. Recommendations ................................................................................................................................... 58 13. Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................... 58 14. References Cited ........................................................................................................................................ 59 Appendices ..........................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EDL – Lessons Learned and Recommendations
    ."#!(*"# 0 1(%"##" !)"#!(*"#* 0 1"!#"("#"#(-$" ."!##("""*#!#$*#( "" !#!#0 1%"#"! /!##"*!###"#" #"#!$#!##!("""-"!"##&!%%!%&# $!!# %"##"*!%#'##(#!"##"#!$$# /25-!&""$!)# %"##!""*&""#!$#$! !$# $##"##%#(# ! "#"-! *#"!,021 ""# !"$!+031 !" )!%+041 #!( !"!# #$!"+051 # #$! !%#-" $##"!#""#$#$! %"##"#!#(- IPPW Enabled International Collaborations in EDL – Lessons Learned and Recommendations: Ethiraj Venkatapathy1, Chief Technologist, Entry Systems and Technology Division, NASA ARC, 2 Ali Gülhan , Department Head, Supersonic and Hypersonic Technologies Department, DLR, Cologne, and Michelle Munk3, Principal Technologist, EDL, Space Technology Mission Directorate, NASA. 1 NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA [email protected]. 2 Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V. (DLR), German Aerospace Center, [email protected] 3 NASA Langley Research Center, Hampron, VA. [email protected] Abstract of the Proposed Talk: One of the goals of IPPW has been to bring about international collaboration. Establishing collaboration, especially in the area of EDL, can present numerous frustrating challenges. IPPW presents opportunities to present advances in various technology areas. It allows for opportunity for general discussion. Evaluating collaboration potential requires open dialogue as to the needs of the parties and what critical capabilities each party possesses. Understanding opportunities for collaboration as well as the rules and regulations that govern collaboration are essential. The authors of this proposed talk have explored and established collaboration in multiple areas of interest to IPPW community. The authors will present examples that illustrate the motivations for the partnership, our common goals, and the unique capabilities of each party. The first example involves earth entry of a large asteroid and break-up. NASA Ames is leading an effort for the agency to assess and estimate the threat posed by large asteroids under the Asteroid Threat Assessment Project (ATAP).
    [Show full text]
  • Mars Mapping, Data Mining, Change Detection, GIS Mapping, Time Series Analysis
    ISPRS Technical Commission IV Symposium on Geospatial Databases and Location Based Services, 14 – 16 May 2014, Suzhou, China, MTSTC4-2014-172-2 TEMPORAL ANALYSIS OF ALL AVAILABLE HIGH-RESOLUTION MARS IMAGING PRODUCTS SINCE 1976 Panagiotis Sidiropoulos1 and Jan-Peter Muller Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College London, Holmbury St Mary, Surrey, RH56NT, UK [email protected], [email protected] Commission KEY WORDS: Mars mapping, data mining, change detection, GIS mapping, time series analysis ABSTRACT: Starting from Viking Orbiter 1, launched in August 1975, several mainly NASA orbiters have been sent to Mars to accomplish the robotic tasks of imaging its surface. Initial analyses of these early images indicated a planet with similar characteristics to the Moon pitted with craters and large volcanic and tectonic features but dead from a geological perspective. Recently, scientific interest has shifted towards high-resolution imaging, which allows the identification of previously undiscovered geological phenomena and surface features as well as the examination of surface composition and geological history. The increasing frequency of Mars orbiters, carrying high-resolution cameras, allows the dynamic analysis of Martian surface, i.e. the analysis of the temporal evolution of certain areas that reveal natural processes that happen over time. The latter can be roughly classified into two major categories; processes that happen periodically each and every Martian season (e.g. seasonal flows in high latitude areas (McEwen et al., 2011) and events that do not follow some iterative pattern but are rather sporadic (e.g. new impact craters (Byrne et al., 2009)). Consequently, it is beneficial to conduct a twin temporal grouping of Mars imaging products, the first examining product distribution through time, so as to point out areas that favor the search for sporadic events, and the second product distribution per season, to identify areas favouring the search for periodic events.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploration of Mars by the European Space Agency 1
    Exploration of Mars by the European Space Agency Alejandro Cardesín ESA Science Operations Mars Express, ExoMars 2016 IAC Winter School, November 20161 Credit: MEX/HRSC History of Missions to Mars Mars Exploration nowadays… 2000‐2010 2011 2013/14 2016 2018 2020 future … Mars Express MAVEN (ESA) TGO Future ESA (ESA- Studies… RUSSIA) Odyssey MRO Mars Phobos- Sample Grunt Return? (RUSSIA) MOM Schiaparelli ExoMars 2020 Phoenix (ESA-RUSSIA) Opportunity MSL Curiosity Mars Insight 2020 Spirit The data/information contained herein has been reviewed and approved for release by JPL Export Administration on the basis that this document contains no export‐controlled information. Mars Express 2003-2016 … First European Mission to orbit another Planet! First mission of the “Rosetta family” Up and running since 2003 Credit: MEX/HRSC First European Mission to orbit another Planet First European attempt to land on another Planet Original mission concept Credit: MEX/HRSC December 2003: Mars Express Lander Release and Orbit Insertion Collission trajectory Bye bye Beagle 2! Last picture Lander after release, release taken by VMC camera Insertion 19/12/2003 8:33 trajectory Credit: MEX/HRSC Beagle 2 was found in January 2015 ! Only 6km away from landing site OK Open petals indicate soft landing OK Antenna remained covered Lessons learned: comms at all time! Credit: MEX/HRSC Mars Express: so many missions at once Mars Mission Phobos Mission Relay Mission Credit: MEX/HRSC Mars Express science investigations Martian Moons: Phobos & Deimos: Ionosphere, surface,
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 E X O M a R S E X O M a R S
    NOTE ADDED BY JPL WEBMASTER: This document was prepared by the European Space Agency. The content has not been approved or adopted by, NASA, JPL, or the California Institute of Technology. This document is being made available for information purposes only, and any views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of NASA, JPL, or the California Institute of Technology. EE XX OO MM AA RR SS ExoMars Status th J. L. Vago and the ExoMars Project Team 20 MEPAG Meeting 3–4 March 2009, Arlington, VA (USA) ExoMars Original Objectives Technology Demonstration Objectives : Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) of a large payload on the surface of Mars; Surface mobility with a rover having several kilometres range; Access to the subsurface with a drill to acquire samples down to 2 metres; Automatic sample preparation and distribution for analysis with scientific instruments. Scientific Objectives (in order of priority): To search for signs of past and present life on Mars; To characterise the water/geochemical environment as a function of depth in the shallow subsurface; To study the surface environment and identify hazards to future human missions; To investigate the planet’s subsurface and deep interior to better understand its evolution and habitability. What is ExoMars Now? KEY REQUIREMENTS FOR EXOMARS : (but also for all future ESA Mars exploration missions) Clear synergy of technology and science goals: ExoMars has to land; ExoMars has to rove; ExoMars has to drill; ExoMars has to perform novel organics
    [Show full text]
  • The Pancam Instrument for the Exomars Rover
    ASTROBIOLOGY ExoMars Rover Mission Volume 17, Numbers 6 and 7, 2017 Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. DOI: 10.1089/ast.2016.1548 The PanCam Instrument for the ExoMars Rover A.J. Coates,1,2 R. Jaumann,3 A.D. Griffiths,1,2 C.E. Leff,1,2 N. Schmitz,3 J.-L. Josset,4 G. Paar,5 M. Gunn,6 E. Hauber,3 C.R. Cousins,7 R.E. Cross,6 P. Grindrod,2,8 J.C. Bridges,9 M. Balme,10 S. Gupta,11 I.A. Crawford,2,8 P. Irwin,12 R. Stabbins,1,2 D. Tirsch,3 J.L. Vago,13 T. Theodorou,1,2 M. Caballo-Perucha,5 G.R. Osinski,14 and the PanCam Team Abstract The scientific objectives of the ExoMars rover are designed to answer several key questions in the search for life on Mars. In particular, the unique subsurface drill will address some of these, such as the possible existence and stability of subsurface organics. PanCam will establish the surface geological and morphological context for the mission, working in collaboration with other context instruments. Here, we describe the PanCam scientific objectives in geology, atmospheric science, and 3-D vision. We discuss the design of PanCam, which includes a stereo pair of Wide Angle Cameras (WACs), each of which has an 11-position filter wheel and a High Resolution Camera (HRC) for high-resolution investigations of rock texture at a distance. The cameras and electronics are housed in an optical bench that provides the mechanical interface to the rover mast and a planetary protection barrier.
    [Show full text]
  • MULTI-SCALE ANALYSIS of ALLUVIAL SEDIMENTARY OUTCROPS in UTAH USING EXOMARS 2020 PANCAM, ISEM, and CLUPI EMULATORS
    49th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2018 (LPI Contrib. No. 2083) 1911.pdf MULTI-SCALE ANALYSIS OF ALLUVIAL SEDIMENTARY OUTCROPS IN UTAH USING EXOMARS 2020 PANCAM, ISEM, and CLUPI EMULATORS. E. J. Allender1, C. R. Cousins1, M. D. Gunn2, R. Barnes3 1School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of St Andrews, Irvine Building, North St, St Andrews, UK ([email protected]), 2Department of Physics, Penglais Campus, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK, 3Imperial College London, Kensington, London, UK. Introduction: As the launch date for the Instrument emulators were deployed at each site to ESA/Roscosmos ExoMars 2020 rover draws near, the simulate the PanCam, ISEM, and CLUPI instruments need for analysis tools to exploit the wealth of data to onboard ExoMars 2020. These were: the Aberstwyth be returned by its Panoramic Camera (PanCam) [1], University PanCam Emulator (AUPE) [8] (spanning Infrared Spectrometer for Mars (ISEM) [2], and 440-1000 nm), a Spectral Evolution spectrometer CLose-UP Imager (CLUPI) [3] instruments becomes (ISEM-E) spanning 440-2500 nm with hyperspectral increasingly important; the exploitation of integrated reolution, and CLUPI-E - a Sigma DSLR camera con- data from these instruments will be invaluable in de- figured to CLUPI specifications [3]. AUPE and tecting evidence of past habitability on Mars and iden- CLUPI-E mosaics were collected at each site, and tifying drilling locations. ISEM-E data points were collected either as vertical Together, PanCam, ISEM, and CLUPI offer multi- logs, or spanning each distinct unit. Soil and rock sam- scale analysis capabilities in both spatial (~140-1310 ples were also collected for each imaged unit at the µm/pixel at 2 m working distance), and spectral (350- study sites to provide spectral and mineralogical 3300 nm) dimensions.
    [Show full text]
  • 18Th EANA Conference European Astrobiology Network Association
    18th EANA Conference European Astrobiology Network Association Abstract book 24-28 September 2018 Freie Universität Berlin, Germany Sponsors: Detectability of biosignatures in martian sedimentary systems A. H. Stevens1, A. McDonald2, and C. S. Cockell1 (1) UK Centre for Astrobiology, University of Edinburgh, UK ([email protected]) (2) Bioimaging Facility, School of Engineering, University of Edinburgh, UK Presentation: Tuesday 12:45-13:00 Session: Traces of life, biosignatures, life detection Abstract: Some of the most promising potential sampling sites for astrobiology are the numerous sedimentary areas on Mars such as those explored by MSL. As sedimentary systems have a high relative likelihood to have been habitable in the past and are known on Earth to preserve biosignatures well, the remains of martian sedimentary systems are an attractive target for exploration, for example by sample return caching rovers [1]. To learn how best to look for evidence of life in these environments, we must carefully understand their context. While recent measurements have raised the upper limit for organic carbon measured in martian sediments [2], our exploration to date shows no evidence for a terrestrial-like biosphere on Mars. We used an analogue of a martian mudstone (Y-Mars[3]) to investigate how best to look for biosignatures in martian sedimentary environments. The mudstone was inoculated with a relevant microbial community and cultured over several months under martian conditions to select for the most Mars-relevant microbes. We sequenced the microbial community over a number of transfers to try and understand what types microbes might be expected to exist in these environments and assess whether they might leave behind any specific biosignatures.
    [Show full text]
  • Raman Spectroscopy of Shocked Gypsum from a Meteorite Impact Crater
    International Journal of Astrobiology 16 (3): 286–292 (2017) doi:10.1017/S1473550416000367 © Cambridge University Press 2016 This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Raman spectroscopy of shocked gypsum from a meteorite impact crater Connor Brolly, John Parnell and Stephen Bowden Department of Geology & Petroleum Geology, University of Aberdeen, Meston Building, Aberdeen, UK e-mail: c.brolly@ abdn.ac.uk Abstract: Impact craters and associated hydrothermal systems are regarded as sites within which life could originate onEarth,and onMars.The Haughtonimpactcrater,one ofthemost well preservedcratersonEarth,is abundant in Ca-sulphates. Selenite, a transparent form of gypsum, has been colonized by viable cyanobacteria. Basementrocks, which havebeenshocked,aremoreabundantinendolithicorganisms,whencomparedwithun- shocked basement. We infer that selenitic and shocked gypsum are more suitable for microbial colonization and have enhanced habitability. This is analogous to many Martian craters, such as Gale Crater, which has sulphate deposits in a central layered mound, thought to be formed by post-impact hydrothermal springs. In preparation for the 2020 ExoMars mission, experiments were conducted to determine whether Raman spectroscopy can distinguish between gypsum with different degrees of habitability. Ca-sulphates were analysed using Raman spectroscopyand resultsshow nosignificant statistical difference between gypsumthat has experienced shock by meteorite impact and gypsum, which has been dissolved and re-precipitated as an evaporitic crust. Raman spectroscopy is able to distinguish between selenite and unaltered gypsum. This showsthat Raman spectroscopy can identify more habitable forms of gypsum, and demonstrates the current capabilities of Raman spectroscopy for the interpretation of gypsum habitability.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Fluid Escape and Related Features in Equatorial Arabia Terra (Mars)
    EPSC Abstracts Vol. 7 EPSC2012-132-3 2012 European Planetary Science Congress 2012 EEuropeaPn PlanetarSy Science CCongress c Author(s) 2012 Ancient fluid escape and related features in equatorial Arabia Terra (Mars) F. Franchi(1), A. P. Rossi(2), M. Pondrelli(3), B. Cavalazzi(1), R. Barbieri(1), Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra e Geologico Ambientali, Università di Bologna, via Zamboni 67, 40129 Bologna, Italy ([email protected]). 2Jacobs University, Bremen, Germany. 3IRSPS, Università D’Annunzio, Pescara, Italy. Abstract Noachian [1]. The ELDs are composed by light rocks showing a polygonal pattern, described elsewhere on Arabia Terra, in the equatorial region of Mars, is Mars [4], and is characterized by a high sinuosity of long-time studied area especially for the abundance the strata that locally follows a concentric trend of fluid related features. Detailed stratigraphic and informally called “pool and rim” structures (Fig. morphological study of the succession exposed in the 1A). Crommelin and Firsoff craters evidenced the occurrences of flow structures and spring deposits that endorse the presence of fluids circulation in the Late Noachian. All the morphologies in these two proto-basins occur within the Equatorial Layered Deposits (ELDs). 1. Introduction Martian layered spring deposits are of considerable interest for their supposed relationship with water and high potential of microbial signatures preservation. Their supposed fluid-related origin [1] makes the Equatorial Layered Deposits attractive targets for future missions with astrobiological purposes. In this study we report the occurrence of mounds fields and flow structures in Firsoff and Crommelin craters and summarize the result of a detailed study of the remote-sensing data sets available in this region.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report Venus Exploration Targets Workshop May 19–21
    Final Report Venus Exploration Targets Workshop May 19–21, 2014, Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, TX Conveners: Virgil (Buck) Sharpton, Larry Esposito, Christophe Sotin Breakout Group Leads Science from the Surface Larry Esposito, Univ. Colorado Science from the Atmosphere Kevin McGouldrick, Univ. Colorado Science from Orbit Lori Glaze, GSFC Science Organizing Committee: Ben Bussey, Martha Gilmore, Lori Glaze, Robert Herrick, Stephanie Johnston, Christopher Lee, Kevin McGouldrick Vision: The intent of this “living” document is to identify scientifically important Venus targets, as the knowledge base for this planet progresses, and to develop a target database (i.e., scientific significance, priority, description, coordinates, etc.) that could serve as reference for future missions to Venus. This document will be posted in the VEXAG website (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/vexag/), and it will be revised after the completion of each Venus Exploration Targets Workshop. The point of contact for this document is the current VEXAG Chair listed at ABOUT US on the VEXAG website. Venus Exploration Targets Workshop Report 1 Contents Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 1. Science on the Surface .............................................................................................................................. 3 2. Science within the Atmosphere ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mars Surface Context Cameras Past, Present, and Future 10.1002/2016EA000166 M
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Aberystwyth Research Portal Aberystwyth University Mars surface context cameras past, present and future Gunn, Matthew; Cousins, Claire Published in: Earth and Space Science DOI: 10.1002/2016EA000166 Publication date: 2016 Citation for published version (APA): Gunn, M., & Cousins, C. (2016). Mars surface context cameras past, present and future. Earth and Space Science, 3(4), 144-162. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EA000166 Document License CC BY-NC-ND General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Aberystwyth Research Portal (the Institutional Repository) are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the Aberystwyth Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the Aberystwyth Research Portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. tel: +44 1970 62 2400 email: [email protected] Download date: 09. Jul. 2020 PUBLICATIONS Earth and Space Science REVIEW Mars surface context cameras past, present, and future 10.1002/2016EA000166 M. D. Gunn1 and C. R. Cousins2 Key Points: 1Institute of Maths, Physics and Computer Science, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK, 2Department of Earth and • Camera systems have been a core component of all instrument payloads Environmental Sciences, Irvine Building, University of St Andrews, St.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave
    PROCEEDINGS OF SPIE Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave Makenzie Lystrup Howard A. MacEwen Giovanni G. Fazio Editors 10–15 June 2018 Austin, Texas, United States Sponsored by 4D Technology (United States) • Andor Technology, Ltd. (United Kingdom) • Astronomical Consultants & Equipment, Inc. (United States) • Giant Magellan Telescope (Chile) • GPixel, Inc. (China) • Harris Corporation (United States) • Materion Corporation (United States) • Optimax Systems, Inc. (United States) • Princeton Infrared Technologies (United States) • Symétrie (France) Teledyne Technologies, Inc. (United States) • Thirty Meter Telescope (United States) •SPIE Cooperating Organizations European Space Organisation • National Radio Astronomy Observatory (United States) • Science & Technology Facilities Council (United Kingdom) • Canadian Astronomical Society (Canada) Canadian Space Association ASC (Canada) • Royal Astronomical Society (United Kingdom) Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy (United States) • American Astronomical Society (United States) • Australian Astronomical Observatory (Australia) • European Astronomical Society (Switzerland) Published by SPIE Volume 10698 Part One of Three Parts Proceedings of SPIE 0277-786X, V. 10698 SPIE is an international society advancing an interdisciplinary approach to the science and application of light. The papers in this volume were part of the technical conference cited on the cover and title page. Papers were selected and subject to review by the editors and conference program committee. Some conference presentations may not be available for publication. Additional papers and presentation recordings may be available online in the SPIE Digital Library at SPIEDigitalLibrary.org. The papers reflect the work and thoughts of the authors and are published herein as submitted. The publisher is not responsible for the validity of the information or for any outcomes resulting from reliance thereon.
    [Show full text]