DOCSLIB.ORG

DEVELOPING a LIGHTWEIGHT MARTIAN SIMULANT and a MINIATURE TRIAXIAL DEVICE for LUNAR and MARTIAN SOILS by YURU LI ZIMMERMAN Submi

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

DEVELOPING A LIGHTWEIGHT MARTIAN SIMULANT AND A MINIATURE TRIAXIAL DEVICE FOR LUNAR AND MARTIAN SOILS by YURU LI ZIMMERMAN Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation Advisor: Professor Xiangwu Zeng Department of Civil Engineering CASE WESTERV RESERVE UNIVERSITY August 2016 CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES We hereby approve the thesis/dissertation of Yuru Li Zimmerman candidate for the degree of Ph.D.*. Committee Chair Xiangwu Zeng Committee Member Adel Saada Committee Member Xiong Yu Committee Member Weihong Guo Date of Dense 7/12/2016 *We also certify that written approval has been obtained for any proprietary material contained therein. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... VI LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... VIII ACKOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. XI ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................XII 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 1.1 History of Space Exploration ............................................................................ 1 1.2 Future of Space Exploration ........................................................................... 11 1.2.1 Why the Moon ...................................................................................... 11 1.2.2 Why Mars ............................................................................................. 14 1.3 Motivation for research ................................................................................... 15 1.4 Scope of Work .................................................................................................. 16 1.5 Outline of the Dissertation .............................................................................. 18 2. LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................19 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 19 2.2 Lunar environment .......................................................................................... 19 2.3 Lunar regolith .................................................................................................. 24 2.3.1 Formation of the lunar regolith .......................................................... 26 2.4 Lunar soil investigation ................................................................................... 28 2.4.1 Soil investigation on the Moon ............................................................ 28 2.4.1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 28 2.4.1.2 Robot Interaction ................................................................................. 30 I 2.4.1.3 Spacecraft Interaction ......................................................................... 35 2.4.1.4 Footprint Analysis ................................................................................ 37 2.4.1.5 Trenching Tests and Boulder Tracks ................................................. 38 2.4.1.6 Penetrometer Tests .............................................................................. 41 2.4.2 Investigation on returned lunar soil ................................................... 47 2.4.2.1 Apollo Soil Samples.............................................................................. 48 2.4.3 Engineering properties of lunar soil ................................................... 52 2.4.3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 52 2.4.3.2 Particle size and shape ......................................................................... 53 2.4.3.3 Specific Gravity .................................................................................... 59 2.4.3.4 Density ................................................................................................... 61 2.4.3.5 Compressibility .................................................................................... 68 2.5 Strength Properties Investigation ................................................................... 73 2.5.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 73 2.5.2 Techniques for Measuring Soil Strength Properties ........................ 75 2.5.2.1 Direct Shear Test.................................................................................. 76 2.5.2.2 Torsional Ring Shear Test .................................................................. 79 2.5.2.3 Triaxial Test ......................................................................................... 80 2.5.3 Strength Properties of Lunar Soil ...................................................... 84 2.5.3.1 Laboratory Measurements of Shear Strength .................................. 85 2.6 Review of lunar soil simulants ........................................................................ 93 2.6.1 MLS-1.................................................................................................... 94 2.6.2 JSC-1 ..................................................................................................... 98 II 2.6.3 JSC-1A ................................................................................................ 102 2.6.4 GRC-3 ................................................................................................. 106 2.6.5 Other Lunar Soil Simulants .............................................................. 108 3. DEVELOPMENT OF A LIGHT WEIGHT MARTIAN SIMULANT ..110 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 110 3.2 Mechanical Properties of Martian Soil ........................................................ 113 3.2.1 Particle Size Distribution .................................................................. 113 3.2.2 Bulk Density ....................................................................................... 114 3.2.3 Shear Strength .................................................................................... 115 3.3 Mechanical Properties of Martian Soil Simulant ....................................... 115 3.3.1 Particle Size Distribution .................................................................. 116 3.3.2 Bulk Density ....................................................................................... 117 3.3.3 Shear Strength .................................................................................... 117 3.4 Method for Creating the CWRU-1 Simulant .............................................. 118 3.5 Geotechnical Properties of CWRU-1 ........................................................... 120 3.5.1 Specific Gravity .................................................................................. 120 3.5.2 Particle Size Distribution .................................................................. 121 3.5.3 Maximum and Minimum Density .................................................... 122 3.5.4 Compressibility .................................................................................. 123 3.5.5 Shear Strength .................................................................................... 125 3.6 Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 128 4. DEVELOPMENT OF A MINIATURE TRIAXIAL TESTING APPARATUS ...............................................................................................130 III 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 130 4.2 Apparatus Description................................................................................... 132 4.2.2 Loading Unit ....................................................................................... 138 4.2.3 Vacuum and Confining System ........................................................ 139 4.2.3.1 Vacuum Unit....................................................................................... 139 4.2.3.2 Confining Unit .................................................................................... 139 4.2.4 Measurement System ......................................................................... 140 4.2.4.1 Displacement Transducer and Load Cell ........................................ 140 4.2.4.2 Data Acquisition Instrument ............................................................ 141 4.2.5 Others .................................................................................................. 143 4.3 Types of Testing for the Miniature Triaxial Apparatus ............................ 144 4.4 Testing Procedures......................................................................................... 144 4.5 Testing Results ............................................................................................... 147 4.5.1 Triaxial Strength Tests for JSC-1A.................................................. 147 4.5.2 Triaxial Strength Tests for Standard Sand ..................................... 152 4.6 Calibration Tests ...........................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • UAD Instance Chart 04.06.15 11:14

    UAD Instance Chart 04.06.15 11:14

    UAD Instance Chart 04.06.15 11:14 Search Site Hardware UAD-2 + Plug-Ins Store Blog Support About My.Uaudio Pressroom Contact Cart SUBSCRIBE TO THE Enter your email address Home > Support > UAD Support > UAD Compatibility > UAD Instance Chart UA NEWSLETTER UAD Instance Chart Online Support About This Chart The following table indicates DSP usage and instance counts for UAD Powered Plug-Ins. See bottom of page for more details about the chart. UAD Powered Plug-In DSP % SOLO DUO QUAD OCTO Contact Us Mono Stereo Mono Stereo Mono Stereo Mono Stereo Mono Stereo Phone Support 4K Buss Compressor 2.8% 3.4% 35 29 70 58 140 116 280 232 USA (toll free) 877-698-2834 4K Channel Strip * 7.4% 11.4% 17 11 34 22 68 44 136 88 International Ampex ATR-102 Mastering Tape Recorder 17.6% 29.0% 5 3 10 6 20 12 40 24 +1-831-440-1176 AMS RMX16 Digital Reverb 40.6% 41.1% 2 2 4 4 8 8 16 16 Germany, Austria, and Switzerland +31 (0) 20 800 4912 API 550A EQ 7.2% 11.7% 13 8 26 16 52 32 104 64 Fax +1-831-461-1550 API 560 EQ 9.2% 15.5% 10 6 20 12 40 24 80 48 Customer support is available from 9am to 5pm, Monday through Friday, PST API Vision Channel Strip * 22.4% 29.7% 4 3 8 6 16 12 32 24 Contact Support Bermuda Triangle 14.3% 28.4% 7 3 14 6 28 12 56 24 Submit a Request bx_digital V2 EQ & De-Esser 3.4% 4.9% N/A 20 N/A 40 N/A 80 N/A 160 Press, Review, and Advertising Inquiries Amanda Whiting bx_digital V2 Mono EQ & De-Esser 3.4% 3.8% 29 20 58 40 116 80 232 160 +1-831-440-1176 bx_refinement 12.3% 11.9% 7 7 14 14 28 28 56 56 Mailing Address Universal Audio, Inc.
  • Cumulated Bibliography of Biographies of Ocean Scientists Deborah Day, Scripps Institution of Oceanography Archives Revised December 3, 2001

    Cumulated Bibliography of Biographies of Ocean Scientists Deborah Day, Scripps Institution of Oceanography Archives Revised December 3, 2001

    Cumulated Bibliography of Biographies of Ocean Scientists Deborah Day, Scripps Institution of Oceanography Archives Revised December 3, 2001. Preface This bibliography attempts to list all substantial autobiographies, biographies, festschrifts and obituaries of prominent oceanographers, marine biologists, fisheries scientists, and other scientists who worked in the marine environment published in journals and books after 1922, the publication date of Herdman’s Founders of Oceanography. The bibliography does not include newspaper obituaries, government documents, or citations to brief entries in general biographical sources. Items are listed alphabetically by author, and then chronologically by date of publication under a legend that includes the full name of the individual, his/her date of birth in European style(day, month in roman numeral, year), followed by his/her place of birth, then his date of death and place of death. Entries are in author-editor style following the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 14th ed., 1993). Citations are annotated to list the language if it is not obvious from the text. Annotations will also indicate if the citation includes a list of the scientist’s papers, if there is a relationship between the author of the citation and the scientist, or if the citation is written for a particular audience. This bibliography of biographies of scientists of the sea is based on Jacqueline Carpine-Lancre’s bibliography of biographies first published annually beginning with issue 4 of the History of Oceanography Newsletter (September 1992). It was supplemented by a bibliography maintained by Eric L. Mills and citations in the biographical files of the Archives of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD.
  • Martian Crater Morphology

    Martian Crater Morphology

    ANALYSIS OF THE DEPTH-DIAMETER RELATIONSHIP OF MARTIAN CRATERS A Capstone Experience Thesis Presented by Jared Howenstine Completion Date: May 2006 Approved By: Professor M. Darby Dyar, Astronomy Professor Christopher Condit, Geology Professor Judith Young, Astronomy Abstract Title: Analysis of the Depth-Diameter Relationship of Martian Craters Author: Jared Howenstine, Astronomy Approved By: Judith Young, Astronomy Approved By: M. Darby Dyar, Astronomy Approved By: Christopher Condit, Geology CE Type: Departmental Honors Project Using a gridded version of maritan topography with the computer program Gridview, this project studied the depth-diameter relationship of martian impact craters. The work encompasses 361 profiles of impacts with diameters larger than 15 kilometers and is a continuation of work that was started at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas under the guidance of Dr. Walter S. Keifer. Using the most ‘pristine,’ or deepest craters in the data a depth-diameter relationship was determined: d = 0.610D 0.327 , where d is the depth of the crater and D is the diameter of the crater, both in kilometers. This relationship can then be used to estimate the theoretical depth of any impact radius, and therefore can be used to estimate the pristine shape of the crater. With a depth-diameter ratio for a particular crater, the measured depth can then be compared to this theoretical value and an estimate of the amount of material within the crater, or fill, can then be calculated. The data includes 140 named impact craters, 3 basins, and 218 other impacts. The named data encompasses all named impact structures of greater than 100 kilometers in diameter.
  • PEANUTS and SPACE FOUNDATION Apollo and Beyond

    PEANUTS and SPACE FOUNDATION Apollo and Beyond

    Reproducible Master PEANUTS and SPACE FOUNDATION Apollo and Beyond GRADE 4 – 5 OBJECTIVES PAGE 1 Students will: ö Read Snoopy, First Beagle on the Moon! and Shoot for the Moon, Snoopy! ö Learn facts about the Apollo Moon missions. ö Use this information to complete a fill-in-the-blank fact worksheet. ö Create mission objectives for a brand new mission to the moon. SUGGESTED GRADE LEVELS 4 – 5 SUBJECT AREAS Space Science, History TIMELINE 30 – 45 minutes NEXT GENERATION SCIENCE STANDARDS ö 5-ESS1 ESS1.B Earth and the Solar System ö 3-5-ETS1 ETS1.B Developing Possible Solutions 21st CENTURY ESSENTIAL SKILLS Collaboration and Teamwork, Communication, Information Literacy, Flexibility, Leadership, Initiative, Organizing Concepts, Obtaining/Evaluating/Communicating Ideas BACKGROUND ö According to NASA.gov, NASA has proudly shared an association with Charles M. Schulz and his American icon Snoopy since Apollo missions began in the 1960s. Schulz created comic strips depicting Snoopy on the Moon, capturing public excitement about America’s achievements in space. In May 1969, Apollo 10 astronauts traveled to the Moon for a final trial run before the lunar landings took place on later missions. Because that mission required the lunar module to skim within 50,000 feet of the Moon’s surface and “snoop around” to determine the landing site for Apollo 11, the crew named the lunar module Snoopy. The command module was named Charlie Brown, after Snoopy’s loyal owner. These books are a united effort between Peanuts Worldwide, NASA and Simon & Schuster to generate interest in space among today’s younger children.
  • A Comparative Analysis of the Geology Tools Used During the Apollo Lunar Program and Their Suitability for Future Missions to the Om on Lindsay Kathleen Anderson

    A Comparative Analysis of the Geology Tools Used During the Apollo Lunar Program and Their Suitability for Future Missions to the Om on Lindsay Kathleen Anderson

    University of North Dakota UND Scholarly Commons Theses and Dissertations Theses, Dissertations, and Senior Projects January 2016 A Comparative Analysis Of The Geology Tools Used During The Apollo Lunar Program And Their Suitability For Future Missions To The oM on Lindsay Kathleen Anderson Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/theses Recommended Citation Anderson, Lindsay Kathleen, "A Comparative Analysis Of The Geology Tools Used During The Apollo Lunar Program And Their Suitability For Future Missions To The oonM " (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1860. https://commons.und.edu/theses/1860 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, and Senior Projects at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE GEOLOGY TOOLS USED DURING THE APOLLO LUNAR PROGRAM AND THEIR SUITABILITY FOR FUTURE MISSIONS TO THE MOON by Lindsay Kathleen Anderson Bachelor of Science, University of North Dakota, 2009 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of North Dakota in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Grand Forks, North Dakota May 2016 Copyright 2016 Lindsay Anderson ii iii PERMISSION Title A Comparative Analysis of the Geology Tools Used During the Apollo Lunar Program and Their Suitability for Future Missions to the Moon Department Space Studies Degree Master of Science In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a graduate degree from the University of North Dakota, I agree that the library of this University shall make it freely available for inspection.
  • EDL – Lessons Learned and Recommendations

    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).
  • Apollo 14 Press

    Apollo 14 Press

    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WO 2-4155 WASHINGT0N.D.C. 20546 lELS.wo 36925 RELEASE NO: 71-3K FOR RELEASE: THURSDAY A. M . January 21, 1971 P R E S S K I T -more - 1/11/71 2 -0- NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (m2) 962-4155 N E w s WASHINGTON,D.C. 20546 mu: (202) 963-6925 FOR RELEASE: THURSDAY A..M. January 21:, 1971 RELEASE NO: 71-3 APOLLO 14 LAUNCH JAN. 31 Apollo 14, the sixth United States manned flight to the Moon and fourth Apollo mission with an objective of landing men on the Moon, is scheduled for launch Jan. 31 at 3:23 p.m. EST from Kennedy Space Center, Fla. The Apollo 14 lunar module is to land in the hilly upland region north of the Fra Mauro crater for a stay of about 33 hours, during whick, the landing crew will leave the spacecraft twice to set up scientific experiments on the lunar surface and to continue geological explorations. The two earlier Apollo lunar landings were Apollo 11 at Tranquillity Base and Apollo 12 at Surveyor 3 crater in the Ocean of Storms. Apollo 14 prime crewmen are Spacecraft Commander Alan B. Shepard, Jr., Command Module Pilot Stuart A. Roosa, and Lunar Module Pilot Edgar I). Mitchell. Shepard is a Navy car-sain Roosa an Air Force major and Mitchell a Navy commander. -more- 1/8/71 -2- Lunar materials brought- back from the Fra Mauro formation are expected to yield information on the early history of the Moon, the Earth and the solar system--perhaps as long ago as five billion years.
  • Jjmonl 1603.Pmd

    Jjmonl 1603.Pmd

    alactic Observer GJohn J. McCarthy Observatory Volume 9, No. 3 March 2016 GRAIL - On the Trail of the Moon's Missing Mass GRAIL (Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory) was a NASA scientific mission in 2011/12 to map the surface of the moon and collect data on gravitational anomalies. The image here is an artist's impres- sion of the twin satellites (Ebb and Flow) orbiting in tandem above a gravitational image of the moon. See inside, page 4 for information on gravitational anomalies (mascons) or visit http://solarsystem. nasa.gov/grail. The John J. McCarthy Observatory Galactic Observer New Milford High School Editorial Committee 388 Danbury Road Managing Editor New Milford, CT 06776 Bill Cloutier Phone/Voice: (860) 210-4117 Production & Design Phone/Fax: (860) 354-1595 www.mccarthyobservatory.org Allan Ostergren Website Development JJMO Staff Marc Polansky It is through their efforts that the McCarthy Observatory Technical Support has established itself as a significant educational and Bob Lambert recreational resource within the western Connecticut Dr. Parker Moreland community. Steve Barone Jim Johnstone Colin Campbell Carly KleinStern Dennis Cartolano Bob Lambert Mike Chiarella Roger Moore Route Jeff Chodak Parker Moreland, PhD Bill Cloutier Allan Ostergren Cecilia Dietrich Marc Polansky Dirk Feather Joe Privitera Randy Fender Monty Robson Randy Finden Don Ross John Gebauer Gene Schilling Elaine Green Katie Shusdock Tina Hartzell Paul Woodell Tom Heydenburg Amy Ziffer In This Issue "OUT THE WINDOW ON YOUR LEFT" ............................... 4 SUNRISE AND SUNSET ...................................................... 13 MARE HUMBOLDTIANIUM AND THE NORTHEAST LIMB ......... 5 JUPITER AND ITS MOONS ................................................. 13 ONE YEAR IN SPACE ....................................................... 6 TRANSIT OF JUPITER'S RED SPOT ....................................
  • Conceptual Human-System Interface Design for a Lunar Access Vehicle

    Conceptual Human-System Interface Design for a Lunar Access Vehicle

    Conceptual Human-System Interface Design for a Lunar Access Vehicle Mary Cummings Enlie Wang Cristin Smith Jessica Marquez Mark Duppen Stephane Essama Massachusetts Institute of Technology* Prepared For Draper Labs Award #: SC001-018 PI: Dava Newman HAL2005-04 September, 2005 http://halab.mit.edu e-mail: [email protected] *MIT Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Cambridge, MA 02139 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 THE GENERAL FRAMEWORK................................................................................ 1 1.2 ORGANIZATION.................................................................................................... 2 2 H-SI BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION ........................................................ 3 2.1 APOLLO VS. LAV H-SI........................................................................................ 3 2.2 APOLLO VS. LUNAR ACCESS REQUIREMENTS ...................................................... 4 3 THE LAV CONCEPTUAL PROTOTYPE............................................................ 5 3.1 HS-I DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................ 5 3.2 THE CONCEPTUAL PROTOTYPE ............................................................................ 6 3.3 LANDING ZONE (LZ) DISPLAY............................................................................. 8 3.3.1 LZ Display Introduction.................................................................................
  • Apollo 11 Astronaut Neil Armstrong Broadcast from the Moon (July 21, 1969) Added to the National Registry: 2004 Essay by Cary O’Dell

    Apollo 11 Astronaut Neil Armstrong Broadcast from the Moon (July 21, 1969) Added to the National Registry: 2004 Essay by Cary O’Dell

    Apollo 11 Astronaut Neil Armstrong Broadcast from the Moon (July 21, 1969) Added to the National Registry: 2004 Essay by Cary O’Dell “One small step for…” Though no American has stepped onto the surface of the moon since 1972, the exiting of the Earth’s atmosphere today is almost commonplace. Once covered live over all TV and radio networks, increasingly US space launches have been relegated to a fleeting mention on the nightly news, if mentioned at all. But there was a time when leaving the planet got the full attention it deserved. Certainly it did in July of 1969 when an American man, Neil Armstrong, became the first human being to ever step foot on the moon’s surface. The pictures he took and the reports he sent back to Earth stopped the world in its tracks, especially his eloquent opening salvo which became as famous and as known to most citizens as any words ever spoken. The mid-1969 mission of NASA’s Apollo 11 mission became the defining moment of the US- USSR “Space Race” usually dated as the period between 1957 and 1975 when the world’s two superpowers were competing to top each other in technological advances and scientific knowledge (and bragging rights) related to, truly, the “final frontier.” There were three astronauts on the Apollo 11 spacecraft, the US’s fifth manned spaced mission, and the third lunar mission of the Apollo program. They were: Neil Armstrong, Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin, and Michael Collins. The trio was launched from Kennedy Space Center in Florida on July 16, 1969 at 1:32pm.
  • The Moon Is a Harsh Chromatogram: the Most Strategic Knowledge Gap (Skg) at the Lunar Surface E

    The Moon Is a Harsh Chromatogram: the Most Strategic Knowledge Gap (Skg) at the Lunar Surface E

    50th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2019 (LPI Contrib. No. 2132) 2766.pdf THE MOON IS A HARSH CHROMATOGRAM: THE MOST STRATEGIC KNOWLEDGE GAP (SKG) AT THE LUNAR SURFACE E. Patrick, R. Blase, M. Libardoni, Southwest Research Institute®, 6220 Culebra Rd., San Antonio, TX 78238 ([email protected]) Introduction: Data from analytical instruments de- a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GCMS) and ployed during multiple lunar missions, combined with revealed 97% of the composition in that mass channel laboratory results[1], suggest the regolith surface of the to be N2. Henderson et al.[5] also identified amino ac- Moon traps more volatiles in gas-surface interactions ids which were attributed to contamination, but results than is currently understood. We assert that the lunar from recent more sensitive LCMS and GCMS experi- surface behaves as a giant 3-D surface chromatogram, ments by Elsila et al.[1] found some amino acid and separating gas molecules by species as each wafts other organic signatures to be extraterrestrial in origin. across the regolith according to its mobility and ad- While these and other investigations suggest contami- sorption characteristics before eventually becoming nation from the Apollo spacecraft as a likely source for trapped. Herein we present supporting evicence for this a number of observed signatures[1,2,4,5], what is not claim. explained is the nature of the trapping mechanism for In gas chromatography (GC), components of a the N2 feature in 10086, and demonstrates gas retention sample are separated within a column according to from a gas that, under most circumstances, exhibits no their individual partitioning coefficients and by such retention at temperatures around 300 K[3].
  • Apollo 13 Mission Review

    Apollo 13 Mission Review

    APOLLO 13 MISSION REVIEW HEAR& BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON AERONAUTICAL AND SPACE SCIENCES UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-FIRST CONGRESS SECOR’D SESSION JUR’E 30, 1970 Printed for the use of the Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 47476 0 WASHINGTON : 1970 COMMITTEE ON AEROKAUTICAL AND SPACE SCIENCES CLINTON P. ANDERSON, New Mexico, Chairman RICHARD B. RUSSELL, Georgia MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Washington CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska STUART SYMINGTON, bfissouri MARK 0. HATFIELD, Oregon JOHN STENNIS, Mississippi BARRY GOLDWATER, Arizona STEPHEN M.YOUNG, Ohio WILLIAM B. SAXBE, Ohio THOJfAS J. DODD, Connecticut RALPH T. SMITH, Illinois HOWARD W. CANNON, Nevada SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, Florida J4MES J. GEHRIG,Stad Director EVERARDH. SMITH, Jr., Professional staffMember Dr. GLENP. WILSOS,Professional #tad Member CRAIGVOORHEES, Professional Staff Nember WILLIAMPARKER, Professional Staff Member SAMBOUCHARD, Assistant Chief Clerk DONALDH. BRESNAS,Research Assistant (11) CONTENTS Tuesday, June 30, 1970 : Page Opening statement by the chairman, Senator Clinton P. Anderson-__- 1 Review Board Findings, Determinations and Recommendations-----_ 2 Testimony of- Dr. Thomas 0. Paine, Administrator of NASA, accompanied by Edgar M. Cortright, Director, Langley Research Center and Chairman of the dpollo 13 Review Board ; Dr. Charles D. Har- rington, Chairman, Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel ; Dr. Dale D. Myers, Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight, and Dr. Rocco A. Petrone, hpollo Director -___________ 21, 30 Edgar 11. Cortright, Chairman, hpollo 13 Review Board-------- 21,27 Dr. Dale D. Mvers. Associate Administrator for Manned SDace 68 69 105 109 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIOSS 1. Internal coinponents of oxygen tank So. 2 ---_____-_________________ 22 2.