An Update on MoonLITE

1
An Update on MoonLITE

• Rob Gowen
• UK Penetrator Consortium

EGU Vienna 2009 April 23
2
MoonLITE - Update

• Mission Overview
• Impact trial
• Programme advances
• International Engagement
• Next steps

3
MoonLITE - Mission
Polar comms orbiter
3

• SpacecraftLunar polar orbit, altitude 100km,
  lt40km for penetrator release.Potential ILN
  comms link
• Payload4 descent modules, each to implant a
  13Kg penetratorat 300m/s into lunar surface
• Landing sites Globally spaced - far side,
  polar regions, near side
• Launch Duration Planned for 2014 1 year
  operations
• Objectives
• network seismology
• polar water and volatiles
• ISRU (water/radiation/quakes)

Far side
4
2
1
4
MoonLITE Heritage

• UK commissioned study of Lunar Mission options
• BNSC-NASA Joint study on Lunar Exploration
• LunarEx Cosmic Visions proposal ( Phase 0)
• (May08) Pendine Impact Trials
• (July08) International Peer Review
• (Mar09) Phase-A Proposal Review
• (Mar09) Parallel technology
  development Prog

5
Pendine Impact Trials
6
Pendine Impact Trials

• Full Scale component level trials
• Conducted at Pendine, South Wales
• May 2008
• 3 penetrators fired at 300m/s into dry sand

7
Penetrator Outline
Full-scale trial Scheduled May 19-23 2008 Fire
3 penetrators at 300m/s impact velocity
13 Kg
0.56m
8
Impact trial Contributors
9
Impact trial Payload
Mass spectrometer
Radiation sensor
Batteries
Magnetometers
Accelerometers Power/Batteries Interconnection Pro
cessing
Micro-seismometers
Accelerometers, Thermometer Batteries,Data logger
Drill assembly
10
Trial Hardware
Bays Stack
11
Impact Trial - Configuration

• Rocket sled
• Penetrator

12
Target

• Dry sand
• 2m x 2m x 6m(deep)

entrance aperture
13
(No Transcript)
14
Results - 1st Trial

• Firing parameters
• Impact velocity 310 m/s
• (c.f. 300m/s nominal)
• Nose-up 10degs (c.f. 0 degs nominal)
• gt worst case

• Penetrator found in top of target
• Glanced off a steel girder which radically
  changed its orientation.
• Penetration 3.9m
• Much ablation to nose and belly
• Rear flare quite distorted.
• Penetrator in one piece ?

15
1st Trial
16
1st Trial Opening up

• s

17
1st Trial after opening up..
Micro seismometer bay
Connecting to MSSL accelerometer and data
processing bay
18
1st Trial accelerometer data
Peak gee forces
10 kgee
Firing Along axis Vertical Horizontal
1st 10 kgee 15 kgee 4 kgee
3rd 11 kgee 17 kgee 7 kgee
Along axis
Girder
Main impact
cutter
15 kgee
Vertical axis

• Along axis
• Cutter 3 kgee
• Main impact 10 kgee
• Girder 1 kgee

4 kgee
Horizontal axis
19
Hi-res MSSL accelerometer data
Lots of high frequency structure
20
2nd Trial
21
3rd Trial
Steel nose for 3rd trial
22
Survival Table
Triple worst case exceeded 300m/s, and gt8deg
attack angle
Item Firing 1 Firing 2 Firing 3
Penetrator ? ? ?
Q-accel sys ? ? ?
Rad sensor ? not present not present
Batteries ? (x reduced capacity) not present not present
Drill assembly ?(x mounting) not present not present
Magnetometer ? not present not present
Micro seismometers not present ? (protected) ? (protected)
Mass spectrometer not present x pressure sensor x 3 heating element x pressure sensor ? 6 heating element
MSSL proc, power accelerometers ? ? (triggered prematurely) ?
No critical failures
23
Impact Trial Objectives

• Demonstrate survivability of penetrator body,
  accelerometers and power system.
• Assess impact on penetrator subsystems and
  instruments.
• Determine internal acceleration environmentat
  different positions within penetrator.
• Extend predictive modelling to new penetrator
  materials,and impact materials.
• Assess alternative packing methods.
• Assess interconnect philosophy.

24
International Peer Review
25
International Peer Review (9-11 July 2008,
London)

• Dr. Carle Pieters1 (Chair), Brown University
• Dr. Catherine L. Johnson, University of British
  Columbia and Scripps Institution of Oceanography
• Dr. Gregory Neumann, NASA GSFC
• Professor F.W. Taylor, University of Oxford
• Dr. Mark Wieczorek, CNRS IPGP
• Assessed science of MoonLITE
• Assessed strawman payload
• Provided prioritization (penetrators/instruments)
• Plus a lot of useful advice and direction

26
Outcomes

• The Panel found the scientific potential of the
  MoonLITE penetrator network concept to be
  exceptionally high in the context of the
  international exploration activities.
• In particular the internal structure of the Moon
  and the existence/nature polar volatiles.
• This exciting mission would provide a stand-alone
  cornerstone to the proposed International Lunar
  Network and is a particularly valuable
  contribution to the early phases of a broader
  Global Exploration Strategy (GES).

Both of these fundamental science issues
(Internal structure and nature of possible polar
volatiles) are well suited to be addressed by an
approach that uses a distributed network of
instrumented penetrators across the Moon. This is
the unique capability potentially provided by the
MoonLITE concept.
27
Phase A
28
UK announces Phase A Study

• In December 2008 the UK announced it would
  undertake a Phase A study of the proposed
  MoonLITE mission
• This study would be supported by NASA
• Study duration 9 months, K.O. April 2009

29
MoonLITE Phase A
Academic Institutes Birkbeck College Imperial
College London (2 departments) Open
University University of Cambridge University
College London (2 departments) University of
Leicester University of Surrey
Industrial Sub-contracts Astrium Magna
Parva QinetiQ (2 sites) Surrey Satellite
Technology Ltd
30
Baseline Mission Architecture
Mission Level
PDS Level
Penetrator Level
Comms Level
Comms Interface Definition
PDS Interface Definition
Penetrator Interface Definition
Mission Requirements
Science Requirements
31
Penetrator Product Breakdown Structure
Descent Camera
Penetrator
Platform Subsystems
Science Instruments
Structure
Thermal control Communications Power Digital
Electronics
Seismometer Geochemistry package Water/Volatiles
package Heat flow Sample Acquisition Magnetometer
Radiation monitor Accelerometer/Tilt Sample
imager Other
Shell Bays Impact protection Thermal insulation
32
International Engagement
33
NASA support to Phase A
Baseline Mission Architecture
Mission Level
PDS Level
Penetrator Level
Comms Level
Comms Interface Definition
PDS Interface Definition
Penetrator Interface Definition
Mission Requirements
Science Requirements
34
International Lunar Network

• MoonLITE is potentially the UKs contribution to
  the ILN
• The MoonLITE orbiter could go on to become a
  relay communications orbiter for a future ILN
• (Penetrator data could be uplinked to other
  orbiters)
• (EOL satellites could provide useful artificial
  seismic events)

35
International Mission Participation

• Mission Level
• Mission sub-system
• Launch
• Mission planning
• Penetrator Level
• Contributions to penetrator elements and
  instruments
• Science Level
• Contribution to science exploitation

36
Instrument AO

• Given a successful Phase A and UK funding
  approval
• During 2010/11 an International AO will be made
  for penetrator payload instruments against a
  strawman payload
• Selection will be according to
• Scientific merit
• Impact of penetrator systems budgets
• Technological maturity/risk

37
Mission Risks

• Technical credibility
• Parallel technology demonstration
• Cost
• Loss of focus

38
Please contact Rob Gowen (rag_at_mssl.ucl.ac.uk)