DOCSLIB.ORG

Lunar Pits: Sublunarean Voids and the Nature of Mare Emplacement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

42nd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2011) 2771.pdf LUNAR PITS: SUBLUNAREAN VOIDS AND THE NATURE OF MARE EMPLACEMENT. J. W. Ashley1, A. K. Boyd1, H. Hiesinger2, M. S. Robinson1, T. Tran1, C. H. van der Bogert2, R. V. Wagner1, and the LROC Science Team. 1Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera, School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-3603 ([email protected]); 2Institut für Planetologie, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Münster, Germany. Introduction: The possibility for shallow, subsur- region within Oceanus Procellarum at approximately face lunar voids has existed in the minds of researchers 14.09°N, 303.31°E. The pit was estimated to be ~ 65 m at least as far back as the 1960’s, often under the head- in diameter, and 80-88 ±10 m deep, with a ceiling 40- ing of lunar caves [1]. Such voids were anticipated as 60 m thick [12]. The SELENE team deduced the for- the straightforward result of lava tube drainage with mation mechanism for the Marius Hills pit to be partial ceiling failure and subsequent collapse [2]. Any future collapse of a lava tube based on its location within a long-term human presence on the Moon will require sinuous rille, and by elimination of other less plausible reliable protection from surface hazards (radiation, mechanisms. Direct imaging of cavernous interiors micrometeorites, temperature fluctuations, solar flares, beneath their ceilings is arguably necessary to confirm etc.), which can be accomplished effectively using this interpretation, and requires the combination of extant lava tube caverns [3-5]. Subsurface void spaces optimal solar incidence and high angle slew (off-nadir) may also preserve unique geologic environments sig- imaging. nificant to scientific exploration, and pits and/or sky- !"#$%&'()*%"*+%, C%02."%5%/'()3$%&'+*%2 !"#$ -./0"( 1%&#//0+220/&%( )"3+'%"( 405%"0( 6-1)47$ %&$ E?( -0/@+/A( 2+'%( +@%/'+!(&0'+#/( 0/@( &%"'+!(&0'+#/F$ !"#$ '#&%()#'$*+$,''-#&&$*.+$+/$*"#$0-%1#$234$1#,&5-#1#)*$ L:J&$0-+A%'#$F>M@1#*#-$0#-$0%U#<$,)(5<,-$-#&+<5*%+)$1+)+@ -#65%-#1#)*&7$ 89$:&&#&&$ 1#*#-$ &;,<#$ /#,*5-#&$ *+$ /,;%<%*,*#$ ;"-+1#$%1,(%)($*+$<+;,*#$&,/#$<,)'%)($&%*#&$/+-$/5*5-#$-+C+*%;$ lights would naturally serve as points of access to those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environments. It is unknown whether these systems are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b '#);#$,)(<#&$,-#$"%("#-$,*$*"#$0+<#&9>$ O?(4:0"0&'%"+P%("%A#>+':(;"#;%"'+%2F$L:J$%1,(#&$#),C<#$ #&*%1,*%+)$ +/$ -#(+<%*"$ *"%;N)#&&$ ,)'$ +*"#-$ N#B$ 0,-,1#*#-&$ present as intricate “plumbing” networks, or occur as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isolated caverns of limited extent. However, it is possi- CDDD( :'';<==,,,?5222?&#5 /,;#7$"**07]]<-+;>&#&#>,&5>#'5 ble that such caverns could extend for tens or even hundreds of kilometers. Features described as pit craters, but having a vari- ety of suggested origins have also been observed on Mars [6, 7], Mercury [8], and the Jovian moon system [e.g., 9, 10], with possibilities for larger-scale pit fea- tures on Venus [11]. In some sources, however, a dis- tinction is made in discussion between pit craters and skylights, the latter term having an implicit mode of origin as that of lava tube ceiling collapse [12-14]. N a Depth Shadow Diameter (m) Slew Incidence A Location Image (m) length m Max Min angle (°) angle (°) B M106662246R 102 60 97 86 0.00 30.52 Mare M126710873R 106 53 95 85 0.00 26.56 Tranquilitatis M137332905R 92 70 98 81 7.05 37.37 M144395745L NM NM 100 NM -50.46 47.92 Marius Hills M114328462R >32* NM 62 48 6.80 61.38 M122584310L 36 19 57 46 0.00 28.08 M133207316L >8* NM 76 61 29.13 82.84 M137929856R NM NM NM NM 42.86 33.79 Mare Ingenii M115225180L >24 NM 146 107 0.00 74.52 M121124338L 68 87 125 97 0.00 52.00 Tuesday, January 4, 2011 M123485893R 47 38 104 68 -5.45 39.05 M128202846L 76 105 125 68 0.00 54.25 M136465172L >47* NM 110 73 15.51 55.47 M138819477R 52 42 101 73 0.00 38.91 * depth estimate less certain due to high slew angles ~ 100 m NM not measureable Table 1. Catalog of images. Figure 1a: Marius Hills pit imaged from a slew angle of Background: The first candidate for such a lunar 43° and a solar incidence angle of 34°. Red arrow shows sun environment was identified with JAXA’s SELenologi- azimuth. N-S pixel scale is 0.55 m; E-W pixel scale is 0.71 cal and Engineering Explorer (SELENE; a.k.a. Ka- m. Note mare bedrock layering in the pit walls. Figure 1b guya) Terrain Camera and Multi-band Imager at 10 m shows the imaging geometry in cross section. Dotted lined resolution during an imaging campaign optimized for zones have not been imaged and are speculative. skylight detection [12]. Nine images (with solar inci- dence angles ranging from ~ 15° to 73°) were collected Features identified as ‘pit-floor craters’ have been by SELENE of a pit feature named Marius Hills Hole found on Mercury during the January 14, 2008, flyby by its discoverers, which is located in the Marius Hills of the MEcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEo- 42nd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2011) 2771.pdf chemistry, and Ranging (MESSENGER) spacecraft plain, without obvious indications of additional subsur- [8]. While these features have a different morphology, face voids. scale, and other interpreted modes of origin [e.g., 8] Mare Tranquilitatis Pit: In contrast to the Marius than lava tube skylights, their presence is interpreted to Hills and Mare Ingenii pits, the Mare Tranquilitatis pit be associated with near-surface magmatic activity, (8.34°N, 33.22°E) is nearly circular in planform, with which may increase the odds of finding lava tube sys- diameters ranging from 85 m to 97 m, and a depth of tems during higher-resolution surface reconnaissance 100 ± 6 m (Figure 2). It was imaged on four orbital after MESSENGER achieves orbital insertion in passes with a maximum slew angle of -51°. Figure 2a March 2011. In addition, pit features interpreted to be shows approximately 39 percent of the floor in direct lava tube skylights to subsurface caverns have been sunlight. Figure 2b is a highly oblique view of the pit, found in volcanic regions on Mars [13]. The confirma- showing excellent detail within the subsurface layering tion of such features within volcanic materials on the and a conspicuous funnel-shaped slope to the rim. An Moon lends credibility to these interpretations and irregular wall profile is suggestive of differential unit possibilities, and encourages their continued explora- strength within the layered materials, possibly resulting tion. from intermittent emplacement of mare deposits with Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) regolith buildup between these events. Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) images have pixel scales up to 0.5 meters at a nominal 50-km altitude over a 2.5 km-wide swath [15], and have been collected for three a b pits found in lunar mare, including the Marius Hills pit imaged by [12].
Recommended publications
  • EPSC-DPS2011-1845, 2011 EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2011 C Author(S) 2011

    EPSC-DPS2011-1845, 2011 EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2011 C Author(S) 2011

    EPSC Abstracts Vol. 6, EPSC-DPS2011-1845, 2011 EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2011 c Author(s) 2011 Analysis of mineralogy of an effusive volcanic lunar dome in Marius Hills, Oceanus Procellarum. A.S. Arya, Guneshwar Thangjam, R.P. Rajasekhar, Ajai Space Applications Centre, Indian Space Research Organization, Ahmedabad-380 015 (India). Email:[email protected] Abstract found on the lunar surface. As a part of initiation of the study of mineralogy of MHC, an effusive dome Domes are analogous to the terrestrial shield located in the south of Rima Galilaei, near the volcanoes and are among the important volcanic contact of Imbrian and Eratosthenian geological units features found on the lunar surface indicative of is taken up for the present study. The morphology, effusive vents of primary volcanism within Mare rheology and the possible dike parameters have regions. Marius Hills Complex (MHC) is one of the already been studied and reported [5]. most important regions on the entire lunar surface, having a complex geological setting and largest distribution of volcanic constructs with an abundant number of volcanic features like domes, cones and rilles. The mineralogical study of an effusive dome located in the south of Rima Galilaei, near the contact of Imbrian and Eratosthenian geological units is done using hyperspectral band parameters and spectral plots so as to understand the compositional variation, the nature of the volcanism and relate it to the rheology of the dome. Fig. 1: Distribution of dome in MHC (Red-the dome under study, Green- from Virtual Moon Atlas, Magenta [6]) and the Study area showing the dome under study on M3 1.
  • A Guideline for a Sustainable Lunar Base Design for Constructed in Lunar Lava Tubes and Their Vertical Skylights

    A Guideline for a Sustainable Lunar Base Design for Constructed in Lunar Lava Tubes and Their Vertical Skylights

    50th International Conference on Environmental Systems ICES-2021-186 12-15 July 2021 A Guideline for a Sustainable Lunar Base Design for Constructed in Lunar Lava Tubes and Their Vertical Skylights Masato Sakurai1, Asuka Shima2, Isao Kawano3, Junichi Haruyama4 Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), Chofu-shi, Tokyo, 182-8522, Japan. and Hiroyuki Miyajima5 International University of Health and Welfare, Narita Campus 1, 4-3, Kōzunomori, Narita, Chiba, 286-8686 Japan The lunar surface is a hostile environment subject to harmful radiation and meteorite impacts. A recently discovered lava tube avoids these risks and, as it undergoes only slight temperature changes, it is a promising location for constructing a lunar base. JAXA engages in research in regenerative ECLSS (Environmental Control Life Support Systems), particularly addressing water and air recycling and treating organic waste. Overcoming these challenges is essential for long-term lunar habitation. This paper presents a guideline for a sustainable lunar base design. Nomenclature ECLSS = Environmental Control Life Support System HTV = H-II Transfer Vehicle ISS = International Space Station JAXA = Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency JSASS = Japan Society for Aeronautical and Space Science MHH = Marius Hills Hole MIH = Mare Ingenii Hole MTH = Mare Tranquillitatis Hole SELENE = Selenological and Engineering Explorer UZUME = Unprecedented Zipangu Underworld of the Moon Exploration (name of the research group for vertical holes) SDGs = Sustainable Development Goals SELENE = Selenological and Engineering Explorer I. Introduction uture space exploration will extend beyond low Earth orbit and dramatically expand in scope. In particular, F industrial activities are planned for the Moon with the development of infrastructure that includes lunar bases. This paper summarizes our study of the construction of a crewed permanent settlement, which will be essential to support long-term habitation, resource utilization, and industrial activities on the Moon.
  • Analysis of Lava Tubes and Skylights in the Lunar Exploration Context

    Analysis of Lava Tubes and Skylights in the Lunar Exploration Context

    EPSC Abstracts Vol. 7 EPSC2012-632-1 2012 European Planetary Science Congress 2012 EEuropeaPn PlanetarSy Science CCongress c Author(s) 2012 Analysis of Lava Tubes and Skylights in the Lunar Exploration Context E. Martellato, B. Foing, J. Benkhoff ESA/ESTEC, Keplerlaan 1, 2201 Noordwijk ZH, The Netherlands (corresponding author: [email protected], [email protected]) collapsed sections of roofs ([6]). Skylights could Abstract originate as enlargement of pre-existing fractures, for instance following a moonquake ([8]), or as The past and current scientific activities related to the incompleting crusting over the melted lava flow (e.g., future robotic and human exploration of the Moon [4]), or as collapse of the lava tubes ceiling caused by have stressed the importance of lava tubes as random meteoroids impacts (e.g., [6]). convenient settlements in an inhospitable planet, providing a natural shielding to a variety of natural 2. Observations hazards with minimizing costs of the construction of manned bases. The detection of lava tubes could be In our analysis, we consider two skylights candidates favoured by the presence of skylights, which also detected by the Terrain Camera onboard the Japanese represent a way to access to these underground orbiter SELenological and Engineering Explorer structures. In this context, we analyze one of the (SELENE) ([9], [10]), and then observed at higher proposed mechanism of skylights formation, that is resolution by Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera random impacts craters, by comparing crater- (LROC) onboard the NASA spacecraft Lunar geometry argumentations ([11]) with numerical Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) ([2]). modelling outcomes. A first pit is located on the Marius Hills region 1.
  • GRAIL-Identified Gravity Anomalies In

    GRAIL-Identified Gravity Anomalies In

    Solar System Exploration Division, GSFC Code 690 GRAIL-identified gravity anomalies in Oceanus Procellarum: Insight into subsurface impact and volcanic/magmatic structures on the Moon Ariel N. Deutsch1, Gregory A. Neumann2, James W. Head1 1Department of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Brown University, 2NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Introduction: Lunar gravity anomalies. Positive Bouguer gravity anomalies. • Four distinctive positive Bouguer gravity anomalies are • Previous work has suggested that these four positive gravity anomalies may be due to: -Subsurface volcanic sills [2]. • New, higher-resolution GRAIL data [3] allow for the re- analysis of these anomalies. • Understanding the subsurface density structures that contribute to these anomalies is important in order to discuss regional impact and volcanic histories, and the evolution of the lunar crust in Oceanus Procellarum. Objectives. 1. Constrain subsurface structures that contribute to the . four positive Bouguer gravity anomalies. 2. Discuss the hidden impact and volcanic histories of . the Moon. Methods. Results: Filled and buried impact craters. RESULTS: MANTLE UPWELLING • Six geologic end-member scenarios are explored to 20 200 1. Filled and Buried Impact 2. Southern Aristarchus Plateau analyze the four observed gravitational anomalies. 15 Model 3 10 GRAIL 100 • Impact crater parameters [e.g., 4] are estimated to C Gravity 5 B from uplift Gravity from A 0 0 km -3 km km ρ = 3150 kg m -5 mGal mGal • Analyses of the generation, ascent, and eruption of -3 mGal ρ = 2800 kg m crater -10 Surface topography -100 -3 of subsurface magmatic structures and also the . -15 ∆ρ = 600 kg m Highland crust -20 -200 Mantle interpretation of surface volcanic features.
  • GRAIL-Identified Gravity Anomalies in Oceanus Procellarum: Insight Into 2 Subsurface Impact and Magmatic Structures on the Moon 3 4 Ariel N

    GRAIL-Identified Gravity Anomalies in Oceanus Procellarum: Insight Into 2 Subsurface Impact and Magmatic Structures on the Moon 3 4 Ariel N

    1 GRAIL-identified gravity anomalies in Oceanus Procellarum: Insight into 2 subsurface impact and magmatic structures on the Moon 3 4 Ariel N. Deutscha, Gregory A. Neumannb, James W. Heada, Lionel Wilsona,c 5 6 aDepartment of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI 7 02912, USA 8 bNASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA 9 cLancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, UK 10 11 Corresponding author: Ariel N. Deutsch 12 Corresponding email: [email protected] 13 14 Date of re-submission: 5 April 2019 15 16 Re-submitted to: Icarus 17 Manuscript number: ICARUS_2018_549 18 19 Highlights: 20 • Four positive Bouguer gravity anomalies are analyzed on the Moon’s nearside. 21 • The amplitudes of the anomalies require a deep density contrast. 22 • One 190-km anomaly with crater-related topography is suggestive of mantle uplift. 23 • Marius Hills anomalies are consistent with intruded dike swarms. 24 • An anomaly south of Aristarchus has a crater rim and possibly magmatic intrusions. 25 26 Key words: 27 Moon; gravity; impact cratering; volcanism 1 28 Abstract 29 30 Four, quasi-circular, positive Bouguer gravity anomalies (PBGAs) that are similar in diameter 31 (~90–190 km) and gravitational amplitude (>140 mGal contrast) are identified within the central 32 Oceanus Procellarum region of the Moon. These spatially associated PBGAs are located south of 33 Aristarchus Plateau, north of Flamsteed crater, and two are within the Marius Hills volcanic 34 complex (north and south). Each is characterized by distinct surface geologic features suggestive 35 of ancient impact craters and/or volcanic/plutonic activity.
  • Development and Field Testing of Moonraker: a Four-Wheel Rover in Minimal Design

    Development and Field Testing of Moonraker: a Four-Wheel Rover in Minimal Design

    Development and Field Testing of Moonraker: a Four-Wheel Rover in Minimal Design Kazuya Yoshida*, Nathan Britton*, John Walker* *Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, Tohoku University, Japan e-mail: yoshida, nathan, [email protected] Abstract A light-weight, four-wheel rover was developed as a research test platform for a low cost lunar exploration that could be conducted commercially near future. The name of the platform is MoonRaker, The purpose of the Moon- Raker development is investigate control techniques and physical performance for a lunar rover with minimal size, such as less than 10 kg. In this paper, the authors de- scribe the design, development and field testing results of the MoonRaker project. 1 Introduction In the Space Robotics Laboratory, Tohoku University, Japan, we developed a light-weight, four-wheel rover as Figure 1. An image of a lava tube skylight, a research test platform for a low cost lunar exploration Marius Hills Hole acquired by Lunar that could be conducted commercially near future. As a Reconnaissance Orbiter Narrow Angle case study, the requirements for the Google Lunar X-Prize Camera (M122584310LE). (GLXP) is considered. In the GLXP, more-than-500 m of traverse across the surface of the Moon and transmission of high quality video images to the Earth are set as the ing for water ice or Helium-3, But one of the most exciting minimum requirements [1]. targets for lunar exploration is potential caves on the sur- ffi As a technical partner of Team Hakuto, an o cial face of the moon. team of the GLXP challenge in Japan, the Space Robotics In recent years, researchers have speculated that un- Laboratory has been working on the development of mo- derground tubes or caves, similar to those found on Earth bile robots (rovers) for wheel-based traverse on the lunar in volcanic areas, may exist on the moon.
  • Detection of Buried Empty Lunar Lava Tubes Using Grail Gravity Data

    Detection of Buried Empty Lunar Lava Tubes Using Grail Gravity Data

    47th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2016) 1509.pdf DETECTION OF BURIED EMPTY LUNAR LAVA TUBES USING GRAIL GRAVITY DATA. R. Sood1, L. Chappaz1, H. J. Melosh1,2, K. C. Howell1, and C. Milbury2. 1School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue Uni- versity, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, [email protected], 2Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907. Introduction: As a part of NASA's Discovery Program, the Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory (GRAIL) spacecraft were launched in September 2011. The sister spacecraft, Ebb and Flow, mapped lunar gravity to an unprecedented precision [1]. High resolu- tion data is currently being utilized to gain a greater understanding of the Moon's interior. Through gravita- tional analysis of the Moon, subsurface features, such as potential buried empty lava tubes, have also been detected [2]. Lava tubes are of interest as possible hu- man habitation sites safe from cosmic radiation, mi- crometeorite impacts and temperature extremes. The existence of such natural caverns is now supported by Kaguya's discoveries [3] of deep pits that may poten- tially be openings to empty lava tubes. In the current investigation, GRAIL gravity data collected at different altitudes is utilized to detect the presence and extent of candidate empty lava tubes beneath the surface of the Figure 1: Free-air and Bouguer cross-correlation maps lunar maria. and free-air/Bouguer correlation along with regional Detection Strategy: Previous work done by Chap- topography in the vicinity of Marius Hills skylight. paz et al., (2014) makes use of two detection strategies based on gradiometry and cross-correlation to detect rrelation between free-air and Bouguer maps where a subsurface features.
  • Detection of Lunar Lava Tubes by Lunar Radar Sounder Onboard Selene (Kaguya)

    Detection of Lunar Lava Tubes by Lunar Radar Sounder Onboard Selene (Kaguya)

    Lunar and Planetary Science XLVIII (2017) 1711.pdf DETECTION OF LUNAR LAVA TUBES BY LUNAR RADAR SOUNDER ONBOARD SELENE (KAGUYA). J. Haruyama1, T. Kaku1,2, R. Shinoda1,2, W. Miyake2, A. Kumamoto3, K. Ishiyama1, T. Nishibori1, K. Yamamoto1, K. Kurosawa4, A.I. Suzuki1, S.T. Crites1, T. Michikami5, Y. Yokota6, R. Sood7, H. J. Melosh7,8, L. Chappaz, K.C. Howell. 1Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (3-1-1 Yoshinodai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210, Japan), 2Engineering Department, Tokai Universi- ty, 3Science Department, Tohoku University, 4Planetary Exploration Research Center, Chiba Institute of Technolo- gy, 5Faculty of Engineering, Kindai University, 6Faculty of Science, Kochi University, 7School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue University, 8Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science, Purdue University . E- Mail:haruyama.junichi_at_jaxa.jp (change “_at_” to @). Introduction: In 2009, three huge pits were dis- aperture radar (SAR) processing[9] with a synthetic covered on the Moon in image data acquired by the aperture of 5 km. The data set is available via the SELENE Terrain Camera. Their diameters and depths JAXA/SELENE (Kaguya) data archive.[10] are several tens of meters or more.[1-3] They are possi- Results: Figure 1 shows an A-scan diagram (pow- ble skylight holes opening on large subsurface caverns ers of received echo vs elevation of subsurface reflect- such as lava tubes, [1] by analogy with similar pits found ing the echo). The echo power was normalized to be on Mars.[4] This possibility was enhanced significantly zero dB for a standard surface echo level, and to be 0 by LRO oblique observations; large openings were km in elevation for the mean radius of 1737.4 km.
  • Technologies Enabling Exploration of Skylights, Lava Tubes and Caves

    Technologies Enabling Exploration of Skylights, Lava Tubes and Caves

    Technologies Enabling Exploration of Skylights, Lava Tubes and Caves NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Phase I FOR OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TECHNOLOGIST NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION GRANT NUMBER: NNX11AR42G AWARD DATE: SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 END DATE: SEPTEMBER 14, 2012 FINAL REPORT BY ASTROBOTIC TECHNOLOGY 4551 FORBES AVE #300 PITTSBURGH, PA 15213-3524 WILLIAM WHITTAKER, PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Abstract Robotic exploration of skylights and caves can seek out life, investigate geology and origins, and open the subsurface of other worlds to humankind. However, exploration of these features is a daunting venture. Planetary voids present perilous terrain that requires innovative technologies for access, exploration, and modeling. This research developed technologies for venturing underground and conceived mission architectures for robotic expeditions that explore skylights, lava tubes and caves. The investigation identified effective designs for mobile robot architecture to explore sub-planetary features. Results provide insight into mission architectures, skylight reconnaissance and modeling, robot configuration and operations, and subsurface sensing and modeling. These are developed as key enablers for robotic missions to explore planetary caves. These results are compiled to generate “Spelunker”, a prototype mission concept to explore a lunar skylight and cave. The Spelunker mission specifies safe landing on the rim of a skylight, tethered descent of a power and communications hub, and autonomous cave exploration by hybrid
  • The Marius Hills Volcanic Complex: a Stratigraphic Study S

    The Marius Hills Volcanic Complex: a Stratigraphic Study S

    Lunar and Planetary Science XXX 1180.pdf THE MARIUS HILLS VOLCANIC COMPLEX: A STRATIGRAPHIC STUDY S. K. Dunkin and D. J. Heather, Department of Physics & Astronomy, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK ([email protected] and [email protected]) Introduction: Marius Hills is a volcanic complex est FeO contents on the Moon. Volcanic features are covering an area of 35,000km2 in the south-central seen on both high- and low-Ti mare units with some, region of Oceanus Procellarum. It is host to a variety such as sinuous rilles, cutting through several flows of of volcanic landforms including sinuous rilles, low more than one unit. As noted by [5] and [7] there ap- domes, steep-sided domes and cones [1]. Previous pears to be no correlation between mare colour and work on this region include both photogeological volcanic features. Mare flows formed both before and studies [1,2,3] and, more recently, multispectral work after the sinuous rilles, as evidenced by the fact that from the Galileo [4] and Clementine missions [5,6,7]. some mare flows overlie part of Rille A (see below) Using the Clementine dataset, we have constructed a making it indistinguishable from the surrounding multispectral mosaic and FeO and TiO2 maps of the mare on the multispectral image. When seen on a Lu- Marius Hills region from 9-16N and 300-312E, in nar Orbiter photograph however, the presence of the order to determine the mare stratigraphy in the region. rille can still be seen at the point where the flow cov- Data Reduction: The Clementine data for this re- ers the rille, which suggests that the flow itself is thin gion was processed using the ISIS software and meth- relative to the depth of the rille.
  • Composition Analysis of the Marius Hills Volcanic Complex Using Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment and Moon Mineralogy Mapper

    Composition Analysis of the Marius Hills Volcanic Complex Using Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment and Moon Mineralogy Mapper

    44th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2013) 1225.pdf Composition Analysis of the Marius Hills Volcanic Complex using Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment and Moon Mineralogy Mapper. K. M. Lehman1,2 , G. Y. Kramer2, R. G. Mayne1,3, W. S. Kiefer2, 1School of Geology, Energy, and the Environment, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX ([email protected]), 2Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, TX. 3Monnig Meteorite Gallery, Fort Worth, TX. Introduction: the material [9, 10]. It is also important to note that a low CF value has a high correlation to high visual al- The Marius Hills Volcanic Complex, located in bedo, and that space weathering causes the CF value to Central Oceanus Procellarum at 13.3 N, 306.8 E , has move to longer wavelengths [10, 11]. All this makes an undoubtedly complicated volcanic history. Over 250 domes and complex surrounding volcanic geo- the CF value very helpful in understanding the geology morphologies suggest multiple volcanic episodes[1]. In of an area. This value is complementary to M3 spectra, allowing for more felsic materials to be observed and light of this, many have investigated potential compo- for a deeper understanding of the entire compositional sitional differences using both Clementine and Chan- mixture as comparison between spectra compositions dryann-1’s Moon Mineralogy Mapper (M3 ) and have and Diviner compositions occur. identified the area as a high titanium basalt with glass features surrounding cones associated with pyroclastic Methodology: [2,3,4]. Beyond subtle variation in FeO percent, TiO2 Three different data sets were used to analyze percent and olivine content, the complex has been this region: Clementine, M3 spectral data, and the deemed compositionally homogenous [2,3,5].
  • Characterization of Previously Unidentified Lunar Pyroclastic Deposits Using Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera Data J

    Characterization of Previously Unidentified Lunar Pyroclastic Deposits Using Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera Data J

    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 117, E00H25, doi:10.1029/2011JE003893, 2012 Characterization of previously unidentified lunar pyroclastic deposits using Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera data J. Olaf Gustafson,1 J. F. Bell III,2,3 L. R. Gaddis,4 B. R. Hawke,5 and T. A. Giguere5,6 Received 1 July 2011; revised 31 March 2012; accepted 14 April 2012; published 8 June 2012. [1] We used a Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) global monochrome Wide-angle Camera (WAC) mosaic to conduct a survey of the Moon to search for previously unidentified pyroclastic deposits. Promising locations were examined in detail using LROC multispectral WAC mosaics, high-resolution LROC Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) images, and Clementine multispectral (ultraviolet-visible or UVVIS) data. Out of 47 potential deposits chosen for closer examination, 12 were selected as probable newly identified pyroclastic deposits. Potential pyroclastic deposits were generally found in settings similar to previously identified deposits, including areas within or near mare deposits adjacent to highlands, within floor-fractured craters, and along fissures in mare deposits. However, a significant new finding is the discovery of localized pyroclastic deposits within floor-fractured craters Anderson E and F on the lunar farside, isolated from other known similar deposits. Our search confirms that most major regional and localized low-albedo pyroclastic deposits have been identified on the Moon down to 100 m/pix resolution, and that additional newly identified deposits are likely to be either isolated small deposits or additional portions of discontinuous, patchy deposits. Citation: Gustafson, J. O., J. F. Bell III, L. R. Gaddis, B.