Lunar and Planetary Science XXXVI (2005) 2179.pdf

Genesis Recovery Processing. E. K. Stansbery1 and Genesis Recovery Processing Team, NASA – Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058 [email protected]

Introduction: The Genesis spacecraft, launched in Au­ readily apparent that the science canister could not be trans­ gust 2001 to collect samples of the solar wind, returned to ported to NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) without sig­ Earth on 8 September 2004. The Sample Return Capsule nificant risk of further damage to the sample collectors (SRC) failed to deploy its drogue parachute and parafoil and (Figure 1) due to the structural damage of the canister and subsequently impacted the Utah Test and Training Range the presence of loose fragments. As a result, the decision (UTTR) at an estimated 310 kph (193 mph). was made to de-integrate the canister in the cleanroom at The goal of the Genesis mission to collect and return UTTR. The sample collectors and wafer fragments would samples of the solar wind for precise elemental and isotopic need to be removed from the canister, documented, and analysis provides the scientific community with a unique set packaged individually for transport to JSC. JPL engineers, of materials to aid in understanding the origin of our solar JSC curatorial personnel, and Genesis Science Team mem­ system. The spacecraft orbited the Earth-Sun L1 point for 29 bers worked together over a four week period to safely re­ months exposing a suite of fifteen types of ultrapure, ul­ cover the sample collectors from the damaged science canis­ traclean materials in several different locations. Most of the ter. The conditions and handling of all hardware and sample materials were mounted on fixed or deployable wafer panels collectors were documented (photos, video, and notes as called “collector arrays”. A few materials were mounted as appropriate) to aid in future scientific study of the samples targets in the focal spot of an electrostatic mirror (the “con­ and space-exposed hardware. centrator”). Other materials were strategically placed to Canister De-integration. As seen in Figure 1, the base of maximize the area for solar-wind collection. the science canister sheared completely from the side walls. Collector Materials: An excellent review of the Gene­ The decision to turn the canister upside down in order to sis collector materials is offered in reference [1]. The con­ contain as many collector fragments as possible in the nearly centrator target is approximately 6cm in diameter composed intact lid was a critically important decision made in the field of four quadrants: one is an amorphous diamond-like carbon, and provided a stable base for further de-integration [2]. one is 13C-diamond, and two are silicon carbide. The bulk of After a thorough inspection it was decided that removal of the collector materials are mounted on the collector arrays. the concentrator would be our first major objective so that Each of four deployable arrays held 54 hexagons of 10.2 cm the concentrator targets (which are the highest priority col­ point-to-point and 6 half-hexagon wafers. The collector lectors) could be documented and safely packaged. The array fixed into the canister cover held 55 hexagon and 6 sidewall and lock-ring of the canister bottom was removed half-hexagon wafers. These collectors included single crys­ for access to the concentrator. Removing the concentrator tal silicon (FZ and CZ), germanium (Ge), sapphire (SAP), provided access to the gold foil collector mounted on the diamond-like carbon on silicon (DOS), silicon on sapphire canister thermal close­ (SOS), aluminum on sapphire (AlOS), gold on sapphire out panel. The gold (AuOS), and a multilayer carbon-cobalt-gold on sapphire foil collector was intact (CCoAuOS). In addition, there were bulk metallic glass, and in good condition gold foil, polished aluminum, and molybdenum coated plati­ (Figure 2). Due to the num foil collectors. compression stress on Recovery Processing: The major portion of the science the thermal panel frame Figure 2: Gold foil collector. canister arrived at the near the array deployment mechanism (ADM) and the close prepared high-bay at proximity of the thermal closeout panel to the collector array 2004.09.08.23:45 UTC stack it was decided to remove the gold foil collector (the (all times given will be second highest priority collector) from the panel (upside Universal Coordinated down) instead of removing the thermal panel with the collec­ Time in the form of tor attached to minimize the risk of damage to the gold foil. yyyy.mm.dd.hh:mm), The removal of the thermal closeout panel also resulted in approximately 8 hours Figure 1: The condition of the sci­ the removal of the polished aluminum collector. after impact. Material ence canister after it was retrieved Concentrator Target Removal. With the concentrator used to wrap the sci­ from the field and brought to the high- separate from the canister, the target was easily visible and bay at UTTR. ence canister in the fully documented prior to developing the removal procedure. field was opened at 2004.09.09.01:04 UTC to assess the The concentrator targets were mounted on a holder attached condition and plan the next steps. The science canister was to the hydrogen rejection and ion acceleration grids (Figure moved into the cleanroom at 2004.09.09.01:34 UTC. It was 3). The gold covered stainless steel support ribs could not be Lunar and Planetary Science XXXVI (2005) 2179.pdf

cut without possible damage to the target materials. The well as photographing the fragment with a scale and color concentrator targets bar so that true size and true color could be recorded. The were recovered nearly size and conditions of intact and with little the fragments varied visible contamination considerably [3] neces­ beyond fine dust. The sitating a variety of only fragmented mate­ packaging techniques. rial was the diamond Those fragments that on silicon quadrant, of Figure 3: Concentrator target after were either large or of which more than 85% removal. very good condition Figure 6: Wafer fragment with scale was recovered in four large fragments, ranging from ~5mm × were packaged in and color bars as well as the inventory 5mm to one half of the quadrant. A cover was installed to fluoroware containers tracking number and container. protect the target and the assembly was secured in an alumi­ when possible (Figure 6). Due to the limited size choices we num case for transport. also packaged fragments in polycarbonate vials and 96-well Array Wafer Removal. The individual deployable array tissue-culture polystyrene plates with cleanroom wipes used frames were mechanically crumpled together from the impact as dunnage and some fragments too small to safely transport requiring that the stack be removed as a single piece. The in other containers bulk metallic glass collector (BMG) was mounted on the top were mounted on of the array deployment mechanism and was removed intact cleanroom post-it notes in remarkably good condition. Although the array wafers (Figure 5). At special were the most seriously request some fragments damaged of the collec­ were wrapped in alu­ tors, breaking to greater minum foil prior to or lesser extent based packaging. A large Figure 5: Stabilizing shards by back­ on position and mate­ number of very small side light tack adhesion. rial (specifically crystal fragments were packaged together in small jars with clean- lattice orientation) there room wipe dunnage. Packaged fragments were put into pre­ were collectors still Figure 4: Array stack positioned for numbered ziplock bags for inventory and tracking. attached to the front removal of wafers attached to the face. Transport to JSC: All collector materials and science surface of the array frames (Figure 4). Documenting and canister hardware were loaded onto the NASA #950NA air­ removing these wafers from face of arrays was of prime im­ craft for transport to JSC at about 2004.10.04.19:00 UTC. portance. One complete hexagon and three half hexagons The aircraft landed at Ellington Field at approximately were removed intact and many smaller pieces were also re­ 2004.10.04.22:30. The material was escorted to JSC that moved from the array face allowing unambiguous identifica­ evening, unloaded and placed in the space-exposed hardware tion of the collectors. A majority of the collector fragments laboratory. Sample containers were moved into the Genesis came loose from the array fasteners and although some frag­ laboratory on 2004.11.04 where highest value and highest ments became lodged in the array frame isogrid of the risk materials were put under clean, dry nitrogen. neighboring array significant fragment mixing between ar­ References: [1] Jurewicz A. J. et al. (2002) Spa. Sci. rays occurred. Rev., 105, 535-560. [2] McNamara K. M. (2005) LPSC Wafer Fragment Documentation and Packaging. The XXXVI, this volume. [3] Allton, J. H. et al. (2005) LPSC primary objectives of collector processing in Utah were to XXXVI, this volume. document the fragments for material, size, condition / con­ Acknowledgements: The author would like to person­ tamination, and location (as possible) and to package the ally thank the entire Genesis team, most especially the team fragments for safe transport with specific emphasis on sur­ who performed so remarkably in processing the sample col­ face preservation. The documentation primarily consisted of lectors in Utah: Don Burnett, Dottie Woolum, Amy a two-step process due to the desire to de-integrate the canis­ Jurewicz, Jim Baughman, Chuck Foehlinger, Andy Stone, ter as quickly as reasonable. As groups of loose fragments Louis Jandura, Rick Paynter, Roger Weins, Juan Baldanado, were removed from the canister the removal location was Karen McNamara, Judy Allton, Jack Warren, Ron Bastien, documented and the fragments were handed off to another Lisa Vidonic, Carol Schwarz, Claire Dardano. processor for individual fragment identification, photodocu­ mentation, and condition assessment could be done prior to packaging. Simple documentation forms were developed and used to provide consist information for all fragments. The documentation included noting the longest dimension as