Environment References
Planetary and orbital hardware is designed against a written description of its environment, not against the environment itself. The description has to give a mechanism designer a density, a friction angle, a temperature swing, a particle flux or an atmospheric profile with a dispersion, and it has to be one that a program can cite and a reviewer can check. The environments are hard to describe because they were sampled sparsely: a few Apollo, Luna and Surveyor sites on the Moon, a handful of landers and rovers on Mars, and almost nothing at Titan or Venus beyond single probes. Each reference below is a compilation or a model fitted to those samples, and each carries the limits of the sampling.
Design specifications
Section titled “Design specifications”Programs converge on a single controlling document so that every contractor designs against the same numbers. For NASA deep space hardware that document is the Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE, SLS-SPEC-159). It converts environment models into design values: thermal extremes, radiation dose, regolith properties, atmospheric density profiles and dust loading. The 2017 revision is retained because much existing hardware was designed against it [1]. A design value in the specification is a requirement, so it can be stricter or looser than the underlying measurement.
Lunar surface
Section titled “Lunar surface”The Lunar Sourcebook is the standing synthesis of Apollo, Luna and Surveyor results, written for engineers [2]. Its geotechnical chapter fixes the numbers a surface machine is designed against: bulk density of 1.50 +/- 0.05 g/cm3 in the top 15 cm and 1.66 +/- 0.05 g/cm3 over the top 60 cm, and a shear strength of 49 degrees friction angle and 1.6 kPa cohesion averaged over the top 60 cm, with the caveat that the Mohr-Coulomb form linearizes a curved envelope [2]. It predates the polar volatiles work, so it does not address ice.
Thermal design draws on the Diviner radiometer results. Nighttime cooling curves give a global thermal inertia of 55 +/- 2 J m-2 K-1 s-1/2 at 273 K for the upper 4 to 7 cm, with conductivity rising from 7.4e-4 to 3.4e-3 W m-1 K-1 between the surface and 1 m depth [3]. The maps span plus and minus 70 degrees latitude, so the polar sites of most interest are outside them [3].
Three further pieces of evidence bear on what the tabulated numbers mean for hardware:
- Thermal cycling, not incidental vibration, compacts lunar regolith simulant, and the compaction grows with the amplitude of the thermal wave [7]. A surface that has cycled for years need not match a freshly prepared test bed.
- Simulants reproduce some properties and not others. A 2005 NASA workshop set out the root and derivative simulant framework and the Apollo failures (wheel slip and sinkage, seal failures, suit abrasion) that motivated testing against traceable materials [4]. The 2024 NASA guide scores fourteen simulants against Apollo and Luna data and concludes that none reproduces every aspect of lunar regolith [5].
- Dust is an environment in its own right. A taxonomy of mitigation technologies sorts them into avoiding generation, preventing adhesion, removal and tolerance [8], and a review of exposure risk covers the toxicity side that sets limits for crewed systems [9].
Later syntheses restate and extend the Sourcebook values. Chapter 9 of the Sourcebook is the geotechnical source itself and reconciles in situ, returned-sample and remote-sensing data [16]. Revision G of the design specification carries a controlled regolith statement of 1.58 +/- 0.05 g/cm3 in the top 30 cm rising to 1.74 by 60 cm, which differs from the Sourcebook averages above [17]. An engineering guide divides the soil into a loose top 10 to 15 cm and a dense layer below, with bulk density following a hyperbolic law from about 1.30 g/cm3 at the surface to an asymptote near 1.92 g/cm3 [18]. A nonlinear Winkler subgrade model joins 776 Apollo bootprints (average modulus 920 Pa/mm at 7.6 mm depth) with about 1000 Lunokhod cone penetrometer measurements [19].
The first-order inputs were read from sparse evidence. Footprint and boulder-track photogrammetry from 323 footprints at four Apollo sites and 69 tracks at 19 sites gave statistical porosity distributions, converted through a correlation built on a lunar soil simulant [31]. The Apollo Soil Mechanics team stated that bulk density may be below 1.0 g/cm3 at the surface in places and about 2.0 g/cm3 a few centimeters down [32]. Compaction experiments on JSC-1A found that vibration alone brings samples to a similar relative density regardless of overburden, which leaves thermal cycling as the candidate for the observed depth trend [25]. Neither mechanism has been shown on the Moon directly.
New landing sites have started to change the table. Yutu-2 wheel-track imagery gives cohesive and frictional moduli at the Chang’e-4 site, compared with Chang’e-3, Luna 17 and Apollo 15 [23]. Returned Chang’e-6 farside soil has a static angle of repose of 52.9 degrees and a dynamic angle of 70.4 degrees, above every nearside soil and simulant measured to date, with a D60 of 48.4 micrometers [24]. These are the first strength data from outside the Apollo and Luna equatorial nearside sites, and they are one landing site each.
For test-bed design, the MSFC simulant guide scores simulants against the Apollo 16 core 64001/64002 and reports no simulant above 0.65 on composition [28]. An open database now records each regolith and simulant property with the method that produced it, penetrometer, footprint, trench, core or boulder track [29]. Pumping a 1 m2 by 0.6 m simulant bed to vacuum disturbs it through escaping interstitial gas, and the controlling variable is pressure decay rate rather than absolute pressure [33].
Mars surface
Section titled “Mars surface”Mars regolith has no sample-return ground truth, so its reference is a mineral recipe derived from in situ analysis. The MGS-1 standard is built from Curiosity CheMin diffraction of the Rocknest deposit, with a grain density of 2.72 g/cm3 and a loose bulk density of 1.23 g/cm3, against 1.07 to 1.64 g/cm3 estimated at the Viking and Pathfinder sites [6]. It does not measure any geotechnical property, so cohesion and friction for Mars hardware still come from lander and rover soil mechanics rather than from the standard [6].
Viking is the ground truth for Mars soil mechanics. The Physical Properties Investigation separated drift material (1,200 kg/m3, friction angle 14 to 21 degrees, cohesion 0.7 to 3.0 kPa), blocky material (1,600 kg/m3, 27 to 32 degrees, 1.5 to 16 kPa) and crusty to cloddy material (about 1,400 kg/m3, roughly 35 degrees) [20]. Cohesion and friction at Gusev and Meridiani were later derived from Spirit and Opportunity wheel trenching and scuffing telemetry [21]. Curiosity terrain properties came from wheel imprints, sinkage and visual-odometry slip over the first 360 sols and 1,828 m [30]. InSight’s radiometer gave a thermal inertia of 183 +/- 25 J m-2 K-1 s-1/2 over fine sand and a conductivity of 0.041 +/- 0.013 W m-1 K-1 [26]. THEMIS nighttime imagery separates subpixel thermal inertia at the Gusev, Gale and Jezero sites [27]. The InSight geology and physical properties investigation was described before landing as a set of camera, radiometer, mole, seismic and arm experiments [22]. These are measurements at a handful of landing sites; the standard in the previous paragraph is a mineral recipe and gives no strength.
Atmospheric models
Section titled “Atmospheric models”The Global Reference Atmospheric Model series provides engineering-level density, temperature and wind profiles with dispersions, and these are the models entry, descent and landing analyses run against. Mars-GRAM began in 1988 as an engineering model atmosphere for Mars built on the pattern of the existing Earth model [10]. Titan-GRAM and Neptune-GRAM were added around 2003 for aerocapture systems analysis [11]. Venus-GRAM covers surface conditions that constrain lander survival time, and Outer Planet GRAM supports probe entry at the giant planets. Titan’s dense atmosphere and low gravity make rotorcraft flight less power-limited than on Mars, which is why Titan-GRAM is the analysis basis for Dragonfly. Flown use is established for Mars EDL and for the Ingenuity flight envelope; the Titan and outer planet models have been used for mission design and have not yet been exercised by a vehicle in those atmospheres.
Radiation and debris
Section titled “Radiation and debris”Radiation environment models are less settled than atmospheric ones. A 2006 NASA briefing described the state of the models as lacking standardization and set out an effort to replace the de facto standards [12]. The Badhwar-O’Neill galactic cosmic ray model is the flux model behind shielding mass and radiation-tolerant avionics decisions. The tradeoff is visible in Ingenuity, which used commercial processors and accepted higher single-event upset rates in exchange for processing capability. Single event effects and transients are treated in avionics tutorial form, from the solar and cosmic ray origin through the LET threshold definitions [13].
Ground simulation is limited by beamline energy. The NASA Space Radiation Laboratory galactic cosmic ray simulator delivers 33 sequential beams from protons to iron to a 500 mGy reference field in 70 to 75 minutes, but it cannot represent the free space spectrum above about 1.5 GeV per nucleon, and it was built for radiobiology rather than parts testing [14].
Bumper is the standard micrometeoroid and orbital debris risk analysis tool, used for shielding design on orbital hardware including the ISS manipulators.
Orbital microgravity
Section titled “Orbital microgravity”An orbiting laboratory is not weightless. A disturbance catalog from Spacelab, SPACEHAB, the shuttle middeck and Mir records crew exercise dominating roughly 1 to 4 Hz, pump transients near 1 mg, and OMS firings with initial transients above 50 mg [15]. The catalog describes classes of disturbance on retired platforms and gives no distribution for any current facility [15].
What is not established
Section titled “What is not established”The Sourcebook values are Apollo-era and cover a small number of equatorial and mid-latitude sites [2]. Regolith thermal properties are constrained only to about 10 cm depth and not at the poles [3]. No simulant reproduces all properties, and the Mars standard has no measured geotechnical values [5][6]. Radiation model standardization was described as unsettled in 2006, and the ground simulator covers a shielded internal environment [12][14]. Orbital microgravity levels have no published distribution [15]. Each requirement in the design specification inherits these limits [1]. Polar and farside strength rests on one returned sample, and the Mars strength values rest on a few landing sites [24][20][21].
References
- Roberts, B. C. (2017). SLS-SPEC-159 Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision E
. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{nasa2017sls, title = {SLS-SPEC-159 Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision E}, author = {Roberts, Barry C.}, institution = {NASA Marshall Space Flight Center}, year = {2017}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20170008140}, abstract = {The DSNE completes environment-related specifications for architecture, system-level, and lower-tier documents by specifying the ranges of environmental conditions that must be accounted for by NASA ESD Programs. To assure clarity and consistency, and to prevent requirements documents from becoming cluttered with extensive amounts of technical material, natural environment specifications have been compiled into this document. The intent is to keep a unified specification for natural environments that each Program calls out for appropriate application. This document defines the natural environments parameter limits (maximum and minimum values, energy spectra, or precise model inputs, assumptions, model options, etc.), for all ESD Programs. These environments are developed by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Natural Environments Branch (MSFC organization code: EV44). Many of the parameter limits are based on experience with previous programs, such as the Space Shuttle Program. The parameter limits contain no margin and are meant to be evaluated individually to ensure they are reasonable (i.e., do not apply unrealistic extreme-on-extreme conditions). The natural environments specifications in this document should be accounted for by robust design of the flight vehicle and support systems. However, it is understood that in some cases the Programs will find it more effective to account for portions of the environment ranges by operational mitigation or acceptance of risk in accordance with an appropriate program risk management plan and/or hazard analysis process. The DSNE is not intended as a definition of operational models or operational constraints, nor is it adequate, alone, for ground facilities which may have additional requirements (for example, building codes and local environmental constraints). "Natural environments," as the term is used here, refers to the environments that are not the result of intended human activity or intervention. It consists of a variety of external environmental factors (most of natural origin and a few of human origin) which impose restrictions or otherwise impact the development or operation of flight vehicles and destination surface systems.} } - Heiken, G. H., Vaniman, D. T. and French, B. M. (1991). Lunar Sourcebook: A User's Guide to the Moon
. Endeavour. Source
BibTeX
@book{heiken1991lunar, title = {Lunar Sourcebook: A User's Guide to the Moon}, author = {Heiken, Grant H. and Vaniman, David T. and French, Bevan M.}, journal = {Endeavour}, volume = {16}, pages = {96}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, year = {1991}, doi = {10.1016/0160-9327(92)90014-g} } - Hayne, P. O., Bandfield, J. L., Siegler, M. A., Vasavada, A. R., Ghent, R. R., Williams, J.-P., Greenhagen, B. T., Aharonson, O., Elder, C. M., Lucey, P. G. and Paige, D. A. (2017). Global Regolith Thermophysical Properties of the Moon From the Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment
. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 12. Source
BibTeX
@article{hayne2017global, title = {Global Regolith Thermophysical Properties of the Moon From the Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment}, author = {Hayne, Paul O. and Bandfield, Joshua L. and Siegler, Matthew A. and Vasavada, Ashwin R. and Ghent, Rebecca R. and Williams, Jean-Pierre and Greenhagen, Benjamin T. and Aharonson, Oded and Elder, Catherine M. and Lucey, Paul G. and Paige, David A.}, journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets}, volume = {122}, number = {12}, pages = {2371--2400}, year = {2017}, doi = {10.1002/2017je005387}, abstract = {Abstract We used infrared data from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment to globally map thermophysical properties of the Moon's regolith fines layer. Thermal conductivity varies from 7.4 × 10 −4 W m −1 K −1 at the surface to 3.4 × 10 −3 W m −1 K −1 at depths of ~1 m, given density values of 1,100 kg m −3 at the surface to 1,800 kg m −3 at 1 m depth. On average, the scale height of these profiles is ~7 cm, corresponding to a thermal inertia of 55 ± 2 J m −2 K −1 s −1/2 at 273 K, relevant to the diurnally active near‐surface layer, ~4–7 cm. The temperature dependence of thermal conductivity and heat capacity leads to an ~2 times diurnal variation in thermal inertia at the equator. On global scales, the regolith fines are remarkably uniform, implying rapid homogenization by impact gardening of this layer on timescales <1 Gyr. Regional‐ and local‐scale variations show prominent impact features <1 Gyr old, including higher thermal inertia (> 100 J m −2 K −1 s −1/2 ) in the interiors and ejecta of Copernican‐aged impact craters and lower thermal inertia (< 50 J m −2 K −1 s −1/2 ) within the lunar cold spots identified by Bandfield et al. (2014). Observed trends in ejecta thermal inertia provide a potential tool for age dating craters of previously unknown age, complementary to the approach suggested by Ghent et al. (2014). Several anomalous regions are identified in the global 128 pixels per degree maps presented here, including a high‐thermal inertia deposit near the antipode of Tycho crater.} } - Sibille, L., Carpenter, P., Schlagheck, R. and French, R. A. (2006). Lunar Regolith Simulant Materials: Recommendations for Standardization, Production, and Usage
. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA/TP-2006-214605. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{sibille2006development, title = {Lunar Regolith Simulant Materials: Recommendations for Standardization, Production, and Usage}, author = {Sibille, Laurent and Carpenter, Paul and Schlagheck, R. and French, R. A.}, number = {NASA/TP-2006-214605}, institution = {NASA Marshall Space Flight Center}, type = {NASA Technical Publication}, year = {2006}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20060051776}, abstract = {Experience gained during the Apollo program demonstrated the need for extensive testing of surface systems in relevant environments, including regolith materials similar to those encountered on the lunar surface. As NASA embarks on a return to the Moon, it is clear that the current lunar sample inventory is not only insufficient to support lunar surface technology and system development, but its scientific value is too great to be consumed by destructive studies. Every effort must be made to utilize standard simulant materials, which will allow developers to reduce the cost, development, and operational risks to surface systems. The Lunar Regolith Simulant Materials Workshop held in Huntsville, AL, on January 24 26, 2005, identified the need for widely accepted standard reference lunar simulant materials to perform research and development of technologies required for lunar operations. The workshop also established a need for a common, traceable, and repeatable process regarding the standardization, characterization, and distribution of lunar simulants. This document presents recommendations for the standardization, production and usage of lunar regolith simulant materials.} } - Slabic, A., Gruener, J. E., Kovtun, R. N., Rickman, D. L., Sibille, L., Oravec, H. A., Edmunson, J. and Keprta, S. (2024). Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide, Revision A
. NASA, NASA/TM-20240011783. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{slabic2024lunar, title = {Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide, Revision A}, author = {Slabic, Ane and Gruener, John E. and Kovtun, Rostislav N. and Rickman, Douglas L. and Sibille, Laurent and Oravec, Heather A. and Edmunson, Jennifer and Keprta, Sean}, number = {NASA/TM-20240011783}, institution = {NASA}, year = {2024}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20240011783}, abstract = {This guide is titled Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide, Rev A, and two points need to be made about the title. First, is the use of the term "regolith". During the Apollo Program, the term "soil" was used for taking a sample of the loose material on the surface, and then cataloging that sample in the lunar curation database as a "soil sample". By the 1980s, the term "regolith" gained favor by lunar scientists. In the Lunar Sourcebook (Heiken et al., 1991), regolith is defined as "a general term for the layer or mantle of fragmental and unconsolidated rock material, whether residual or transported and of highly varied character, that nearly everywhere forms the surface of the land and overlies or covers bedrock". Regolith is a terrestrial term that seems to go back to 1897, according to a recent paper by Huggett (2023). Huggett summed up his paper by writing, "soil and regolith are one in the same". "Regolith" will mostly be used throughout this guide, as it tends to separate in one's mind the unique nature of the Moon's surface when compared to the inherent bias humans have in their mind when they hear and use the word "soil". When referring to Apollo samples, "soil" is used for historical context and in some places the simple term "lunar simulant" is also used. Secondly, Rev A is used in the title because NASA released its first Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide in 2010, near the end of NASA's Constellation Program (Schrader et al., 2010). This guide follows in the pattern of that first guide and will be updated on a periodic basis as new simulants are created, characterized and used, and as new information emerges about the Moon's regolith due to new lunar exploration missions, both robotic and human.} } - Cannon, K. M., Britt, D. T., Smith, T. M., Fritsche, R. F. and Batcheldor, D. (2019). Mars Global Simulant MGS-1: A Rocknest-based Open Standard for Basaltic Martian Regolith Simulants
. Icarus. Source
BibTeX
@article{cannon2019mars, title = {Mars Global Simulant MGS-1: A Rocknest-based Open Standard for Basaltic Martian Regolith Simulants}, author = {Cannon, Kevin M. and Britt, Daniel T. and Smith, Trent M. and Fritsche, Ralph F. and Batcheldor, Daniel}, journal = {Icarus}, volume = {317}, pages = {470--478}, year = {2019}, doi = {10.1016/j.icarus.2018.08.019} } - Metzger, P. T., Anderson, S. and Colaprete, A. (2018). Experiments Indicate Regolith is Looser in the Lunar Polar Regions than at the Lunar Landing Sites
. ASCE Earth and Space Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{metzger2018experiments, title = {Experiments Indicate Regolith is Looser in the Lunar Polar Regions than at the Lunar Landing Sites}, author = {Metzger, Philip T. and Anderson, Serena and Colaprete, Anthony}, booktitle = {ASCE Earth and Space Conference}, pages = {79-85}, publisher = {American Society of Civil Engineers}, year = {2018}, doi = {10.1061/9780784481899.009}, abstract = {Since the Apollo program or earlier it has been widely believed that the lunar regolith was compacted through vibrations including nearby impact events, thermal stress release in the regolith, deep moon quakes, and shallow moon quakes. Experiments have shown that vibrations both compact and re-loosen regolith as a function of depth in the lunar soil column and amplitude of the vibrational acceleration. Experiments have also identified another process that is extremely effective at compacting regolith: the expansion and contraction of individual regolith grains due to thermal cycling in the upper part of the regolith where the diurnal thermal wave exists. Remote sensing data sets from the Moon suggest that the soil is less compacted in regions where there is less thermal cycling, including infrared emissions measured by the Diviner radiometer on the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). Here, we performed additional experiments in thermal cycling simulated lunar regolith and confirm that it is an effective compaction mechanism and may explain the remote sensing data. This creates a consistent picture that the soil really is looser in the upper layers in polar regions, which may be a challenge for rovers that must drive in the looser soil.} } - Cannon, K. M., Dreyer, C. B., Sowers, G. F., Schmit, J., Nguyen, T., Sanny, K. and Schertz, J. (2022). Working with lunar surface materials: Review and analysis of dust mitigation and regolith conveyance technologies
. Acta Astronautica. Source
BibTeX
@article{cannon2022working, title = {Working with lunar surface materials: Review and analysis of dust mitigation and regolith conveyance technologies}, author = {Cannon, Kevin M. and Dreyer, Christopher B. and Sowers, George F. and Schmit, John and Nguyen, Thao and Sanny, Keoni and Schertz, Joshua}, journal = {Acta Astronautica}, volume = {196}, pages = {259--274}, year = {2022}, doi = {10.1016/j.actaastro.2022.04.037}, abstract = {The Moon's dusty surface environment threatens any equipment that operates there, especially for long-duration infrastructure needed for a sustained lunar presence. This is doubly true for systems that convey regolith, which by agitating the soil are certain to generate dust. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of technologies that have been proposed to convey regolith on the lunar surface, and to mitigate against dust hazards that are generated by such transport systems. We define functional taxonomies for both regolith conveyance and dust mitigation, then carry out quantitative trade studies in several categories for each. Examples include passive and active dust mitigation, and horizontal and near vertical conveyance. Conveyance technologies that scored particularly high include wheeled haulers, conveyor belts, and auger/hopper transfer points. High scoring dust mitigation technologies include the lotus leaf passive coating, Electrodynamic Dust Shield, and boots or bellow made of fiberglass fabric. We also explore novel or unconventional concepts and describe how dust mitigation and regolith conveyance can be combined using a systems approach with multiple technologies layered together. The results from the trade studies and the subsequent recommendations constitute a practical guide that can be used for designing and developing systems that must perform efficiently and reliably to carry out useful tasks on the Moon or Mars, such as resource extraction, construction, and additive manufacturing.} } - Cain, J. R. (2010). Lunar dust: The Hazard and Astronaut Exposure Risks
. Earth, Moon, and Planets, 1. Source
BibTeX
@article{cain2010lunar, title = {Lunar dust: The Hazard and Astronaut Exposure Risks}, author = {Cain, John R.}, journal = {Earth, Moon, and Planets}, volume = {107}, number = {1}, pages = {107--125}, publisher = {Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, year = {2010}, doi = {10.1007/s11038-010-9365-0} } - Justus, C. G. and Chimonas, G. (1988). Development of an Engineering Model Atmosphere for Mars
. Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Geophysical Sciences, NASA-CR-182462. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{justus1988development, title = {Development of an Engineering Model Atmosphere for Mars}, author = {Justus, C. G. and Chimonas, George}, number = {NASA-CR-182462}, institution = {Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Geophysical Sciences}, year = {1988}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19880008184}, abstract = {An engineering model atmosphere for Mars is being developed with many of the same features and capabilities for the highly successful Global Reference Atmospheric Model (GRAM) program for Earth's atmosphere. As an initial approach, the model is being built around the Martian atmosphere model computer subroutine (ATMOS) of Culp and Stewart (1984). In a longer-term program of research, additional refinements and modifications will be included. ATMOS includes parameterizations to stimulate the effects of solar activity, seasonal variation, diurnal variation magnitude, dust storm effects, and effects due to the orbital position of Mars. One of the current shortcomings of ATMOS is the neglect of surface variation effects. The longer-term period of research and model building is to address some of these problem areas and provide further improvements in the model (including improved representation of near-surface variations, improved latitude-longitude gradient representation, effects of the large annual variation in surface pressure because of differential condensation/sublimation of the CO2 atmosphere in the polar caps, and effects of Martian atmospheric wave perturbations on the magnitude of the expected density perturbation.} } - Justus, C. G., Duvall, A. and Keller, V. W. (2003). Engineering-Level Model Atmospheres for Titan and Neptune
. AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, 20030066242. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{justus2003engineering, title = {Engineering-Level Model Atmospheres for Titan and Neptune}, author = {Justus, C. G. and Duvall, Aleta and Keller, Vernon W.}, booktitle = {AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit}, number = {20030066242}, institution = {NASA Marshall Space Flight Center}, year = {2003}, doi = {10.2514/6.2003-4803}, abstract = {Engineering-level atmospheric models for Titan and Neptune have been developed for use in NASA s systems analysis studies of aerocapture applications in missions to the outer planets. Analogous to highly successful Global Reference Atmospheric Models for Earth (GRAM, Justus et al., 2000) and Mars (Mars-GRAM, Justus and Johnson, 2001, Justus et al., 2002) the new models are called Titan-GRAM and Neptune-GRAM. Like GRAM and Mars-GRAM, an important feature of Titan-GRAM and Neptune-GRAM is their ability to simulate quasi-random perturbations for Monte- Carlo analyses in developing guidance, navigation and control algorithms, and for thermal systems design.} } - Barth, J., Xapsos, M., Lauenstein, J.-M. and Ladbury, R. (2007). Radiation Environment Modeling for Spacecraft Design: New Model Developments. ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20070006516
BibTeX
@misc{barth2007radiation, title = {Radiation Environment Modeling for Spacecraft Design: New Model Developments}, author = {Barth, Janet and Xapsos, Mike and Lauenstein, Jean-Marie and Ladbury, Ray}, howpublished = {Presentation at the NASA}, year = {2007}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20070006516}, abstract = {A viewgraph presentation on various new space radiation environment models for spacecraft design is described. The topics include: 1) The Space Radiatio Environment; 2) Effects of Space Environments on Systems; 3) Space Radiatio Environment Model Use During Space Mission Development and Operations; 4) Space Radiation Hazards for Humans; 5) "Standard" Space Radiation Environment Models; 6) Concerns about Standard Models; 7) Inadequacies of Current Models; 8) Development of New Models; 9) New Model Developments: Proton Belt Models; 10) Coverage of New Proton Models; 11) Comparison of TPM-1, PSB97, AP-8; 12) New Model Developments: Electron Belt Models; 13) Coverage of New Electron Models; 14) Comparison of "Worst Case" POLE, CRESELE, and FLUMIC Models with the AE-8 Model; 15) New Model Developments: Galactic Cosmic Ray Model; 16) Comparison of NASA, MSU, CIT Models with ACE Instrument Data; 17) New Model Developmemts: Solar Proton Model; 18) Comparison of ESP, JPL91, KIng/Stassinopoulos, and PSYCHIC Models; 19) New Model Developments: Solar Heavy Ion Model; 20) Comparison of CREME96 to CREDO Measurements During 2000 and 2002; 21) PSYCHIC Heavy ion Model; 22) Model Standardization; 23) Working Group Meeting on New Standard Radiation Belt and Space Plasma Models; and 24) Summary.} } - Perez, R. J. (2016). Analysis and Simulations of Space Radiation Induced Single Event Effects and Transients
. IEEE International Conference on Space Mission Challenges for Information Technology. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{perez2016analysis, title = {Analysis and Simulations of Space Radiation Induced Single Event Effects and Transients}, author = {Perez, Reinaldo J.}, booktitle = {IEEE International Conference on Space Mission Challenges for Information Technology}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2016}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:2014/49065} } - Simonsen, L. C., Slaba, T. C., Guida, P. and Rusek, A. (2020). NASA’s first ground-based Galactic Cosmic Ray Simulator: Enabling a new era in space radiobiology research
. PLOS Biology, 5. Source
BibTeX
@article{simonsen2020nasa, title = {NASA’s first ground-based Galactic Cosmic Ray Simulator: Enabling a new era in space radiobiology research}, author = {Simonsen, Lisa C. and Slaba, Tony C. and Guida, Peter and Rusek, A.}, journal = {PLOS Biology}, volume = {18}, number = {5}, pages = {e3000669}, publisher = {Public Library of Science (PLoS)}, year = {2020}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pbio.3000669} } - DeLombard, R., McPherson, K., Hrovat, K., Moskowitz, M., Rogers, M. J. B. and Reckart, T. (1997). Microgravity Environment Description Handbook
. NASA, NASA-TM-107486. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{delombard1997microgravity, title = {Microgravity Environment Description Handbook}, author = {DeLombard, Richard and McPherson, Kevin and Hrovat, Kenneth and Moskowitz, Milton and Rogers, Melissa J. B. and Reckart, Timothy}, number = {NASA-TM-107486}, institution = {NASA}, year = {1997}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19970022250}, abstract = {The Microgravity Measurement and Analysis Project (MMAP) at the NASA Lewis Research Center (LeRC) manages the Space Acceleration Measurement System (SAMS) and the Orbital Acceleration Research Experiment (OARE) instruments to measure the microgravity environment on orbiting space laboratories. These laboratories include the Spacelab payloads on the shuttle, the SPACEHAB module on the shuttle, the middeck area of the shuttle, and Russia's Mir space station. Experiments are performed in these laboratories to investigate scientific principles in the near-absence of gravity. The microgravity environment desired for most experiments would have zero acceleration across all frequency bands or a true weightless condition. This is not possible due to the nature of spaceflight where there are numerous factors which introduce accelerations to the environment. This handbook presents an overview of the major microgravity environment disturbances of these laboratories. These disturbances are characterized by their source (where known), their magnitude, frequency and duration, and their effect on the microgravity environment. Each disturbance is characterized on a single page for ease in understanding the effect of a particular disturbance. The handbook also contains a brief description of each laboratory.} } - Carrier, W. D. I., Olhoeft, G. R. and Mendell, W. (1991). Physical Properties of the Lunar Surface
. Lunar Sourcebook: A User's Guide to the Moon. Source
BibTeX
@incollection{carrier1991physical, title = {Physical Properties of the Lunar Surface}, author = {Carrier, W. David, III and Olhoeft, Gary R. and Mendell, Wendell}, editor = {Heiken, Grant H. and Vaniman, David T. and French, Bevan M.}, booktitle = {Lunar Sourcebook: A User's Guide to the Moon}, pages = {475--594}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, chapter = {9}, year = {1991}, url = {https://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/books/lunar_sourcebook/pdf/Chapter09.pdf} } - NASA. (2020). Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE), Revision G
. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{nasa2020cross, title = {Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE), Revision G}, author = {{NASA}}, institution = {NASA Marshall Space Flight Center}, year = {2020}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20200000867}, abstract = {The DSNE completes environment-related specifications for architecture, system-level, and lower-tier documents by specifying the ranges of environmental conditions that must be accounted for by NASA ESD Programs. To assure clarity and consistency, and to prevent requirements documents from becoming cluttered with extensive amounts of technical material, natural environment specifications have been compiled into this document. The intent is to keep a unified specification for natural environments that each Program calls out for appropriate application.} } - Connolly, J. F. and Carrier, W. D. (2023). An Engineering Guide to Lunar Geotechnical Properties
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{connolly2023engineering, title = {An Engineering Guide to Lunar Geotechnical Properties}, author = {Connolly, John F. and Carrier, W. David}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, pages = {1-9}, address = {Big Sky, Montana}, year = {2023}, doi = {10.1109/aero55745.2023.10115961}, abstract = {The renewed interest in returning human and robotic explorers to the lunar surface has identified a need for a renewed understanding of lunar geotechnical properties related to landing, exploration, excavation, and construction activities on the lunar surface. This paper summarizes measurements conducted during US and Russian/Soviet landed missions as well as experiments performed on returned samples to establish fundamental geotechnical properties such as particle size distribution, particle shape, bulk density, shear strength, cohesion and bearing strength. While many of these properties are well known, how they vary with increased lunar soil depth is less understood, and those properties that vary significantly as a function of depth are explored in additional detail. Selected examples discuss mechanical excavation forces, rocket exhaust erosion forces, and the preparation of launch/landing pad surfaces, with the goal of a better understanding of lunar soil geotechnical properties that apply to large-scale exploration of the lunar surface and dictate the design of future exploration systems.} } - Connolly, J. F. and Carrier, W. D. (2022). Updating Lunar Subsurface Geotechnical Properties Based Upon Nonlinear Winkler Modeling of Apollo and Lunokhod Measurements
. Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 20220018853. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{connolly2022updating, title = {Updating Lunar Subsurface Geotechnical Properties Based Upon Nonlinear Winkler Modeling of Apollo and Lunokhod Measurements}, author = {Connolly, John F. and Carrier, W. David}, booktitle = {Lunar and Planetary Science Conference}, number = {20220018853}, institution = {NASA Johnson Space Center}, address = {The Woodlands, TX}, year = {2022}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20220018853}, abstract = {Returning human and robotic explorers to the lunar surface has identified a need for a renewed understanding of lunar geotechnical properties related to landing on and exploring the lunar surface. We review fundamental lunar geotechnical properties such as bulk density, cohesion, friction angle and shear strength, and apply new data derived from Apollo and Lunokhod geotechnical measurements to update the understanding of lunar regolith behavior. The analysis derives a new, nonlinear relationship of lunar geotechnical properties as a function of depth.} } - Moore, H. J., Hutton, R. E., Clow, G. D. and Spitzer, C. R. (1987). Physical Properties of the Surface Materials at the Viking Landing Sites on Mars
. U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1389. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{moore1987physical, title = {Physical Properties of the Surface Materials at the Viking Landing Sites on Mars}, author = {Moore, Henry J. and Hutton, Robert E. and Clow, Gary D. and Spitzer, Cary R.}, number = {Professional Paper 1389}, institution = {U.S. Geological Survey}, year = {1987}, doi = {10.3133/pp1389}, abstract = {Estimates of water and carbon dioxide in samples analyzed in_ the gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer for the Molecular Analysis Experiment-----------------------} } - Sullivan, R., Anderson, R., Biesiadecki, J., Bond, T. and Stewart, H. (2011). Cohesions, friction angles, and other physical properties of Martian regolith from Mars Exploration Rover wheel trenches and wheel scuffs
. Journal of Geophysical Research. Source
BibTeX
@article{sullivan2011cohesions, title = {Cohesions, friction angles, and other physical properties of Martian regolith from Mars Exploration Rover wheel trenches and wheel scuffs}, author = {Sullivan, R. and Anderson, R. and Biesiadecki, J. and Bond, T. and Stewart, H.}, journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research}, volume = {116}, pages = {E02006}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union (AGU)}, year = {2011}, doi = {10.1029/2010je003625}, abstract = {[1] The Mars Exploration Rovers Spirit and Opportunity investigated the physical properties of Martian regolith in 7 wheel trenches and 20 wheel scuffs distributed along traverses at Gusev crater and Meridiani Planum. Specialized wheel-trenching sequences allowed analysis of wheel motor and suspension telemetry to determine regolith friction angle ϕ and cohesion c at trench sites. Friction angles were 30°–37°, and cohesions were 0–2 kPa. Simpler wheel-scuff maneuvers were analyzed for cohesion by assuming the range of ϕ determined from trenches; cohesions in wheel-scuffed regoliths were from 0 to 11 kPa. Regolith ϕ and c can be related to regolith origins. Grain sorting, compaction, shape, size, and angularity influence ϕ. Impact cratering and aeolian processes have affected grain angularity and sorting of Martian regolith at both Mars Exploration Rover (MER) landing sites and contend in opposing ways to determine grain characteristics in the regolith. Friction angles are consistent with dry, rigid, nonplaty grains with particle size frequencies dominated by very fine sand (as seen by the Microscopic Imager or MI) with at least some grain rounding (unresolved by MI), reflecting physical weathering from aeolian saltation. Friction angle results from MER trenches therefore indicate that regolith states are between fully mature aeolian materials and impact debris. MI and color Pancam views show trench tailings and trench floors are redder, brighter, and have more intermixed extremely fine (unresolved) grains than regolith closer to the surface disturbed and exposed only by rolling tracks.} } - Golombek, M., Grott, M., Kargl, G., Andrade, J., Marshall, J. P., Warner, N., Teanby, N. A., Ansan, V., Hauber, E., Voigt, J. R. C., Lichtenheldt, R., Knapmeyer-Endrun, B., Daubar, I. J., Kipp, D., Muller, N., Lognonné, P., Schmelzbach, C., Banfield, D., Trebi-Ollennu, A., Maki, J., Kedar, S., Mimoun, D., Murdoch, N., Piqueux, S., Delage, P., Pike, W. T., Charalambous, C., Lorenz, R., Fayon, L., Lucas, A., Rodriguez, S., Morgan, P., Spiga, A., Panning, M. P., Spohn, T., Smrekar, S., Gudkova, T., Garcia, R., Giardini, D., Christensen, U., Nicollier, T., Sollberger, D., Robertsson, J., Ali, K., Kenda, B. and Banerdt, W. B. (2018). Geology and Physical Properties Investigations by the InSight Lander
. Space Science Reviews, 5. Source
BibTeX
@article{golombek2018geology, title = {Geology and Physical Properties Investigations by the InSight Lander}, author = {Golombek, M. and Grott, Matthias and Kargl, Günter and Andrade, J. and Marshall, Jason P. and Warner, N. and Teanby, N. A. and Ansan, Veronique and Hauber, Ernst and Voigt, Joana R. C. and Lichtenheldt, Roy and Knapmeyer-Endrun, Brigitte and Daubar, Ingrid J. and Kipp, D. and Muller, N. and Lognonné, Philippe and Schmelzbach, C. and Banfield, Don and Trebi-Ollennu, Ashitey and Maki, J. and Kedar, Sharon and Mimoun, David and Murdoch, Naomi and Piqueux, Sylvain and Delage, P. and Pike, W. T. and Charalambous, C. and Lorenz, R. and Fayon, L. and Lucas, A. and Rodriguez, S. and Morgan, P. and Spiga, Aymeric and Panning, Mark P. and Spohn, Tilman and Smrekar, Susan and Gudkova, T. and Garcia, R. and Giardini, Domenico and Christensen, U. and Nicollier, T. and Sollberger, D. and Robertsson, J. and Ali, K. and Kenda, B. and Banerdt, W. Bruce}, journal = {Space Science Reviews}, volume = {214}, number = {5}, pages = {84}, year = {2018}, doi = {10.1007/s11214-018-0512-7} } - Tang, Z., Liu, J., Wang, X., Ren, X., Chen, W., Yan, W., Zhang, X., Tan, X., Zeng, X., Liu, D., Zhang, H., Wen, W., Zuo, W., Su, Y., Yang, J. and Li, C. (2020). Physical and Mechanical Characteristics of Lunar Soil at the Chang'E-4 Landing Site
. Geophysical Research Letters. Source
BibTeX
@article{tang2020physical, title = {Physical and Mechanical Characteristics of Lunar Soil at the Chang'E-4 Landing Site}, author = {Tang, Zhencheng and Liu, Jianjun and Wang, Xing and Ren, Xin and Chen, Wangli and Yan, Wei and Zhang, Xiaoxia and Tan, Xu and Zeng, Xingguo and Liu, Dawei and Zhang, Hongbo and Wen, Weibin and Zuo, Wei and Su, Yan and Yang, Jianfeng and Li, Chunlai}, journal = {Geophysical Research Letters}, volume = {47}, year = {2020}, doi = {10.1029/2020gl089499}, abstract = {Abstract Chang'E‐4, with the Yutu‐2 rover, is the first lunar probe to successfully land and conduct a tour on the far side of the Moon from early 2019. We analyze the physical and mechanical characteristics of lunar soil through the in situ terrain data collected by the panoramic camera onboard the Yutu‐2 rover. With the slip ratio and wheel sinkage obtained by the derived Digital Orthophoto Map (DOM) and Digital Elevation Model (DEM), the mechanical parameters of lunar soil are derived from the slip‐sinkage model. These mechanical parameters and wheel size of the rover are used to obtain the pressure‐sinkage curves, which can estimate the lunar soil strength. The experimental results indicate that the soil strength at the Chang'E‐4 landing site is much higher than that at the Chang'E‐3 landing site. The discrepancies in lunar soil strength between the two landing sites may be related to the local surface topography and degree of space weathering.} } - Qi, S., Li, L., Hou, X., Qiao, S., Ma, X., Lu, X., Cong, J., Hao, R., Zhang, C., Li, J., Elsworth, D., Yang, W., Li, X.-H. and Wu, F.-Y. (2025). Strongly Cohesive Lunar Soil Identified at the Chang'e-6 Landing Site
. Nature Astronomy. Source
BibTeX
@article{qi2025strongly, title = {Strongly Cohesive Lunar Soil Identified at the Chang'e-6 Landing Site}, author = {Qi, Shengwen and Li, Lihui and Hou, Xiaokun and Qiao, Sijia and Ma, Xiandong and Lu, Xiao and Cong, Jianing and Hao, Ruipeng and Zhang, Chi and Li, Jinhua and Elsworth, Derek and Yang, Wei and Li, Xian-Hua and Wu, Fu-Yuan}, journal = {Nature Astronomy}, volume = {10}, pages = {214-223}, year = {2025}, doi = {10.1038/s41550-025-02715-3}, abstract = {Abstract The physical properties of lunar soil are critical to understanding its evolution. However, the extent of the diversity among the global lunar soils remains unclear owing to limited sampling sites. Here we present a systematic investigation of the angle of repose (AOR), particle morphology and size distribution of soil obtained at the Chang’e-6 (CE-6) landing site, the first sample from the lunar farside. The CE-6 sample has a maximum static AOR of 52.9°, which is substantially higher than those of the Chang’e-5 and Apollo soil simulants. In addition, a substantially larger dynamic AOR of 70.4° is exhibited by the CE-6 sample compared with the CE-5 soil simulant, indicating a stronger cohesive property. This strong cohesive property can be attributed to the high plagioclase abundance and potentially strong space weathering at the sampling, especially impact reworking, which resulted in a fine particle size ( D 60 = 48.4 μm) of the CE-6 sample with a high portion of the intermediate fraction (that is, 11–125 μm) and a more complex morphology with a small mean sphericity ( S mean = 0.58). These characteristics enhance the cohesiveness by strengthening electrostatic and van der Waals forces. This finding discloses key factors controlling the AOR and provides a fresh genesis perspective for understanding the physical properties of lunar soil, with implications for lunar evolution and future lunar resource utilization.} } - Gamsky, J. N. and Metzger, P. T. (2010). The Physical State of Lunar Soil in the Permanently Shadowed Craters of the Moon
. ASCE Earth and Space Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{gamsky2010physical, title = {The Physical State of Lunar Soil in the Permanently Shadowed Craters of the Moon}, author = {Gamsky, Jacob N. and Metzger, Philip T.}, booktitle = {ASCE Earth and Space Conference}, pages = {260-265}, publisher = {American Society of Civil Engineers}, year = {2010}, doi = {10.1061/41096(366)27}, abstract = {The physical state of the lunar soil in the permanently shadowed craters of the moon is inferred from experimental investigation. The permanently shadowed craters do not undergo the same thermal cycling experienced by other parts of the moon and therefore could be slightly less compacted. This study is significant because excavating, roving, and landing interactions, along with the energy budgets and deployment schedules for associated technology, need to be scaled and designed properly. Results indicate that the degree of compaction due to thermal cycling is a function of the depth in the soil column.} } - Piqueux, S., Müller, N., Grott, M., Siegler, M., Millour, E., Forget, F., Lemmon, M., Golombek, M., Williams, N., Grant, J., Warner, N., Ansan, V., Daubar, I., Knollenberg, J., Maki, J., Spiga, A., Banfield, D., Spohn, T., Smrekar, S. and Banerdt, B. (2021). Soil Thermophysical Properties near the InSight Lander Derived from 50 Sols of 1 Radiometer Measurements
. AIAA SciTech Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{piqueux2021soil, title = {Soil Thermophysical Properties near the InSight Lander Derived from 50 Sols of 1 Radiometer Measurements}, author = {Piqueux, Sylvain and Müller, Nils and Grott, Matthias and Siegler, Matthew and Millour, Ehouarn and Forget, Francois and Lemmon, Mark and Golombek, Matthew and Williams, Nathan and Grant, John and Warner, Nicholas and Ansan, Veronique and Daubar, Ingrid and Knollenberg, Jörg and Maki, Justin and Spiga, Aymeric and Banfield, Don and Spohn, Tilman and Smrekar, Susan and Banerdt, Bruce}, booktitle = {AIAA SciTech Conference}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2021}, doi = {10.48577/jpl.stuq1u} } - Ahern, A. A., Rogers, A. D., Edwards, C. S. and Piqueux, S. (2021). Thermophysical Properties and Surface Heterogeneity of Landing Sites on MarsFrom Overlapping Thermal Emission Imaging System (THEMIS) Observations
. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. Source
BibTeX
@article{ahern2021thermophysical, title = {Thermophysical Properties and Surface Heterogeneity of Landing Sites on MarsFrom Overlapping Thermal Emission Imaging System (THEMIS) Observations}, author = {Ahern, Alexandra A. and Rogers, A. Deanne and Edwards, Christopher S. and Piqueux, Sylvain}, journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2021}, doi = {10.48577/jpl.acmzup}, abstract = {Orbitally derived thermal inertia (TI) values of surfaces allow for remote interpretation ofrock and sediment physical characteristics. The evolving local times of the Mars OdysseyThermal Emission Imaging System (THEMIS) mission have enabled surface temperature datacollection over multiple seasons and local times over ∼9 Mars years (MY). We utilize thishigher temporal resolution data set to separate TI values of individual materials withinTHEMIS pixels (100 m sampling). In this study, we focus on geologic units within Gusev, Gale,and Jezero crater landing sites to determine their respective TI and ground-truth ourmethods. We use the KRC model to predict temperatures for a range of homogeneous andtwo-component thermophysical mixing scenarios (laterally and vertically heterogeneous),and compare those to THEMIS brightness temperatures. The Gusev and Gale crater resultsare consistent with rover-based evaluations, indurated or clast-covered sands. The best-fi tscenarios along the Jezero crater volcanic fl oor unit show low to moderate TI valuesrepresentative of coarse sediment, volcaniclastic, or pyroclastic rocks. The light toned unitand western fan deposits both indicate sands and a moderate TI component; we interpretthis as heavy fracturing within the rock. Diffi culties in modeling some THEMIS temperaturesare attributed to daily weather eff ects, local atmospheric dust variability, and real surfacechanges over time (e.g., dust deposition and removal); we also observe that sometemperature observations lead to non-unique modeled physical solutions. Nevertheless,these methods can still rule out a signifi cant range of material properties and providemeaningful geologic information about Mars’ surface.} } - Schrader, C. M., Rickman, D. L., McLemore, C. A. and Fikes, J. C. (2010). Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide
. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA/TM-2010-216446. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{schrader2010lunar, title = {Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide}, author = {Schrader, C. M. and Rickman, Douglas L. and McLemore, Carole A. and Fikes, John C.}, number = {NASA/TM-2010-216446}, institution = {NASA Marshall Space Flight Center}, year = {2010}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20100038451}, abstract = {Based on primary characteristics, currently or recently available lunar regolith simulants are discussed from the perspective of potential experimental uses. The characteristics used are inherent properties of the material rather than their responses to behavioral (geomechanical, physiochemical, etc.) tests. We define these inherent or primary properties to be particle composition, particle size distribution, particle shape distribution, and bulk density. Comparable information about lunar materials is also provided. It is strongly emphasized that anyone considering either choosing or using a simulant should contact one of the members of the simulant program listed at the end of this document.} } - Gasteiner, L. and Murdoch, N. (2026). An Open Database of Lunar Regolith and Simulants Properties
. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.03829. Source
BibTeX
@article{gasteiner2026open, title = {An Open Database of Lunar Regolith and Simulants Properties}, author = {Gasteiner, Léonie and Murdoch, Naomi}, journal = {arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.03829}, year = {2026}, doi = {10.1002/nag.70432}, abstract = {ABSTRACT Lunar regolith, the layer of unconsolidated material covering the Moon's surface, is central to the science and technology developed for the Moon, notably related to in‐situ science investigations, resource utilization, surface infrastructure, and mobility systems. However, data on lunar soil properties remain fragmented across decades of mission reports, often in formats that are difficult to access or interpret. We present a newly compiled database of lunar regolith physical and geotechnical properties, including data collected by direct in‐situ measurements from crewed missions, estimates inferred from surface interactions on the Moon and using remote sensing, as well as laboratory analyses of samples returned to Earth. The data collected include, among others, the angle of internal friction and cohesion (both Mohr‐Coulomb model parameters), bulk density, and static bearing capacity, extracted from Luna and Apollo‐era historical mission documentation all the way to contemporary Lunar programs. The dataset specifies the type and location of the tests from which each value was obtained. Our database also includes parameters for some lunar regolith simulants, providing a direct link between mission data and laboratory studies. In addition to centralizing this information, we developed a user interface that facilitates data retrieval, filtering, and visualization. This interface enables users to generate customized plots for comparative analysis. Developed in an open‐science perspective, it is designed to evolve in response to the community's needs. The database and its associated tools significantly enhance the accessibility and usability of lunar regolith and simulants data for scientific and engineering research.} } - Arvidson, R. E., Bellutta, P., Calef, F., Fraeman, A. A., Garvin, J. B., Gasnault, O., Grant, J. A., Grotzinger, J. P., Hamilton, V. E., Heverly, M., Iagnemma, K. A., Johnson, J. R., Lanza, N., Le Mouelic, S., Mangold, N., Ming, D. W., Mehta, M., Morris, R. V., Newsom, H. E., Renno, N., Rubin, D., Scheiber, J., Sletten, R., Stein, N. T., Thuillier, F., Vasavada, A. R., Vizcaino, J. and Wiens, R. C. (2014). Terrain Physical Properties Derived from Orbital Data and the First 360 Sols of Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover Observations in Gale Crater
. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 20190002035. Source
BibTeX
@article{arvidson2014terrain, title = {Terrain Physical Properties Derived from Orbital Data and the First 360 Sols of Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover Observations in Gale Crater}, author = {Arvidson, Raymond E. and Bellutta, Paolo and Calef, F. and Fraeman, Abigail A. and Garvin, James B. and Gasnault, Olivier and Grant, John A. and Grotzinger, John P. and Hamilton, Victoria E. and Heverly, M. and Iagnemma, K. A. and Johnson, Jeffrey R. and Lanza, Nina and Le Mouelic, S. and Mangold, N. and Ming, D. W. and Mehta, M. and Morris, Richard V. and Newsom, H. E. and Renno, N. and Rubin, David and Scheiber, J. and Sletten, R. and Stein, N. T. and Thuillier, Franck and Vasavada, Ashwin R. and Vizcaino, J. and Wiens, Roger C.}, journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets}, volume = {119}, number = {20190002035}, pages = {1322-1344}, institution = {NASA}, year = {2014}, doi = {10.1002/2013je004605}, abstract = {Abstract Physical properties of terrains encountered by the Curiosity rover during the first 360 sols of operations have been inferred from analysis of the scour zones produced by Sky Crane Landing System engine plumes, wheel touch down dynamics, pits produced by Chemical Camera (ChemCam) laser shots, rover wheel traverses over rocks, the extent of sinkage into soils, and the magnitude and sign of rover‐based slippage during drives. Results have been integrated with morphologic, mineralogic, and thermophysical properties derived from orbital data, and Curiosity‐based measurements, to understand the nature and origin of physical properties of traversed terrains. The hummocky plains (HP) landing site and traverse locations consist of moderately to well‐consolidated bedrock of alluvial origin variably covered by slightly cohesive, hard‐packed basaltic sand and dust, with both embedded and surface‐strewn rock clasts. Rock clasts have been added through local bedrock weathering and impact ejecta emplacement and form a pavement‐like surface in which only small clasts (<5 to 10 cm wide) have been pressed into the soil during wheel passages. The bedded fractured (BF) unit, site of Curiosity's first drilling activity, exposes several alluvial‐lacustrine bedrock units with little to no soil cover and varying degrees of lithification. Small wheel sinkage values (<1 cm) for both HP and BF surfaces demonstrate that compaction resistance countering driven‐wheel thrust has been minimal and that rover slippage while traversing across horizontal surfaces or going uphill, and skid going downhill, have been dominated by terrain tilts and wheel‐surface material shear modulus values.} } - Houston, W. N., Hovland, H. J., Mitchell, J. K. and Namiq, L. I. (1972). Lunar Soil Porosity and Its Variation as Estimated from Footprints and Boulder Tracks
. Lunar Science Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{houston1972lunar, title = {Lunar Soil Porosity and Its Variation as Estimated from Footprints and Boulder Tracks}, author = {Houston, William N. and Hovland, H. John and Mitchell, James K. and Namiq, L. I.}, booktitle = {Lunar Science Conference}, volume = {3}, pages = {3255--3263}, publisher = {The M.I.T. Press}, year = {1972}, url = {https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1972LPSC....3.3255H} } - Mitchell, J. K., Houston, W. N., Scott, R. F., Costes, N. C., Carrier, W. D. and Bromwell, L. G. (1972). Mechanical properties of lunar soil: Density, porosity, cohesion, and angle of internal friction
. Lunar Science Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{mitchell1972mechanical, title = {Mechanical properties of lunar soil: Density, porosity, cohesion, and angle of internal friction}, author = {Mitchell, James K. and Houston, William N. and Scott, Ronald F. and Costes, Nicholas C. and Carrier, W. D. and Bromwell, L. G.}, booktitle = {Lunar Science Conference}, volume = {3}, pages = {3235--3253}, publisher = {The M.I.T. Press}, year = {1972}, url = {https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1972LPSC....3.3235M} } - Kleinhenz, J. E. and Wilkinson, R. A. (2014). Development and Testing of an ISRU Soil Mechanics Vacuum Test Facility
. NASA Glenn Research Center, NASA/TM-2014-218389. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{kleinhenz2014development, title = {Development and Testing of an ISRU Soil Mechanics Vacuum Test Facility}, author = {Kleinhenz, Julie E. and Wilkinson, R. Allen}, number = {NASA/TM-2014-218389}, institution = {NASA Glenn Research Center}, year = {2014}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20150000323}, abstract = {For extraterrestrial missions, earth based testing in relevant environments is key to successful hardware development. This is true for both early component level development and system level integration. For In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) on the moon, hardware must interface with the surface material, or regolith, in a vacuum environment. A relevant test environment will therefore involve a vacuum chamber with a controlled, properly conditioned bed of lunar regolith simulant. However, in earth-based granular media, such as lunar regolith simulant, gases trapped within the material pore structures and water adsorbed to all particle surfaces will release when exposed to vacuum. Early vacuum testing has shown that this gas release can occur violently, which loosens and weakens the simulant, altering the consolidation state. A mid-size chamber (3.66 m tall, 1.5 m inner diameter) at the NASA Glenn Research Center has been modified to create a soil mechanics test facility. A 0.64 m deep by 0.914 m square metric ton bed of lunar simulant was placed under vacuum using a variety of pumping techniques. Both GRC-3 and LHT-3M simulant types were used. Data obtained from an electric cone penetrometer can be used to determine strength properties at vacuum including: cohesion, friction angle, bulk density and shear modulus. Simulant disruptions, caused by off-gassing, affected the strength properties, but could be mitigated by reducing pump rate. No disruptions were observed at pressures below 2.5 Torr, regardless of the pump rate. The slow off-gassing of the soil at low pressure lead to long test times; a full week to reach 10(exp -5) Torr. Robotic soil manipulation would enable multiple ISRU hardware test within the same vacuum cycle. The feasibility of a robotically controlled auger and tamper was explored at vacuum conditions.} }