1
Optimizing Science and Exploration Working Group (OSEWG) Overview “What is Required to Make Lunar Exploration Sustainable”
John Olson, PhD ESMD DIO
NASA Headquarters
November 16, 2009
OSEWG 101: ♦ What it is ♦ What it does ♦ How it supports policy ♦ Integrated current picture ♦ Forward work ♦ Changes ahead
Optimizing Science and Exploration Working Group (OSEWG)
3
Optimizing Science and Exploration Working Group (OSEWG)
♦ Managing entity for collaboration and communication between and among ESMD, SMD, the science community, and associated partners, to achieve NASA's science and exploration goals
♦ Chartered in 2007 by ESMD & SMD [Direction: ESMD/DIO & SMD/PSD] to: • Coordinate and guide science and exploration planning, including identifying and
providing science objectives and requirements for consideration of inclusion into the Constellation architecture
• Generate and integrate science inputs to exploration program (current policy) – Includes all science fields – Includes all scenarios: including orbital, outpost, and sortie planning – Science objectives input provided by NAS, Decadal, NAC, NRC SCEM, LEAG
• Focus ESMD-SMD coordination and communications – Science Objectives and Scenarios – Science Payloads (1 way and Roundtrip) – Analogs – Lunar Data Integration
♦ Engage science and exploration communities (LEAG, CAPTEM, MEPAG, industry, academia, NLSI, LPI, etc) for input, peer review and participation in planning, prioritizing and development of products
OSEWG Interfaces
4
5
System Relationships
• Sequence, Phasing • Servicing • Sample Acquisition
– Decision Making Criteria
– Analysis – Tools
Sites
Analog Planning &
Verification
Req’d/Suggested Technologies
Payload ID and Data
Campaign Analysis
•
Operations Concepts
Exploration Requirements
Objectives
Design Reference Scenarios
• Robotic Support • Mobility • Navigation • Communication • Carriers,
Packaging • Logistics
Science on, of, and from the Moon
Science Objectives as Foundation to Requirements
6
Science Objectives in Many Science Disciplines
7
8
1 2
3 4
Informed by • Apollo • LEAG • OSEWG Spt Team • LESWG • NAS, NRC • NLSI, LPI
Reviewed by • OSEWG • OSEWG Spt Team • EARD Book Mgr • CxP Level 2+ • DPMC
8
• Functional Objectives • Start Date • Flight Rate • Mission Type • # of Locations Visited • Etc.
Establish Lunar Exploration Campaign Framework
• Element Manifest • Gross tradable resource
availability • Surface Days • Utilization Hours • Utilization Mass (by location, over time)
Develop Initial Integrated Campaign Manifest
• Filter out all individual Science Investigations/degrees that cannot be satisfied due to a particular Resource constraint (e.g. # sites)
• Accommodate remaining Science Investigations based on resource availability, accounting for Investigation Phasing
• Balance tradable resources to support investigations
Assess Ability to Address Science Objectives
• Table identifying degree and schedule associated with addressing each Science Investigation
• Summary table of the # of Investigations addressed to varying degree
Science FOMs Output
• Sites Visited • Days on Surface • Utilization Mass • Utilization EVA Hours • Utilization IVA Hours • # of Excursions • Etc. (by location, over time)
Develop Final Integrated Campaign Manifest
Addressing and Integrating Science Objectives for Sustainability
9
Supporting and Leveraging Data Integration
10
Analogs
11
Workshops
12
Continuing and Forward Work
♦ Continue & Evolve: Science objectives and requirements ♦ Continue: Assess science specific mass, volume, mobility, etc. ♦ Continue: Refine and refresh potential payload process & database ♦ Continue: Leverage various science interests via diverse support team and
external science ties to determine all lunar science functional needs ♦ Develop: Processes for traverse planning, sample & data acq,
documentation, laboratory analysis, sample return and curation ♦ Continue work with:
• ILIADS for traverse planning • LSOS for various information such as lighting along a specific traverse • Analogs for development, testing and training • LRO and other lunar orbiter programs to obtain data) for efficient science plans • CAPTEM to determine science return and sample handling issues
♦ Continue: Identify technology needs and dev opportunities ♦ Maintain: Awareness of commercial & int’l activities/dynamics ♦ Proceed: Study scoping science & payload integration process ♦ Further Investigate: Outpost and Sortie variations over campaign evolution ♦ Identify: payload sequencing and research plans to establish refined
manifest and integration schedule 13
14
OSWEG Changes Coming
Changes and Evolution
♦ New Chair: Mike Wargo • Charged to provide proposal/recommendations to meet evolving needs
♦ Clarify Roles & Responsibilities ♦ Strengthen NASA Core Capability (Gov’t Leadership Role) ♦ Integrate More Fully: Vertical and Horizontal ♦ Increase Internal & External Engagement
Likely Future Actions ♦ Annual Work Plans and Performance Eval ♦ More Competitive Work Allocation ♦ New Name ♦ New Process ♦ New Objectives Stakeholder Links
Refining Organization & Links for Long-Term Sustainability
Proposed New Requirements to EARD
♦ Environment ♦ Planetary Protection, Mars Forward ♦ Lunar Sortie Missions ♦ Human Research Program Mission Duration ♦ Surface Mobility Range ♦ Minimum Delivery Mass ♦ Minimum Return Mass ♦ Minimum Delivery Volume ♦ Minimum Return Volume ♦ Power ♦ Communication ♦ Data ♦ Technology Development Needs
16
TO: [Ex-0072] The Constellation
Architecture shall allocate at least 250
(TBR-EARD- 047) kg (551 lbm) of cargo
return mass capability per lunar
mission to support science
Draft Req’ts in Review and Coordination Prior to Dec 2009 ESMD DPMC
OSEWG Summary
♦ 3 Primary Tasks in Work to Support Current US Policy and Exploration Plans: • Science Objectives and Requirements • Surface Science Scenario Dev • Science Payloads
♦ Good work done to date ♦ Evolutionary change w/focus on: • Integration • Enhanced Communication • Mission Prioritization • Task Effectiveness • Process Efficiency
Science and Exploration Integration are Vital to Sustainability
Back-up Slides
♦ OSEWG Process Example
19
Design Reference Mission Structure of South Pole Aitken Basin (SPA):
Malapert Mountain
• Field Trip to Malapert Mountain – Duration: 3 days – Distance from Shackleton Outpost: <150km radius – Provisions
• 4 crew • 2 Small Pressurized Rovers • 2 science packages
• Plan – Day 1: Shackleton to edge of Malapert Mountain Rampart – Day 2: Ascend and Descend Malapert Mountain Rampart; drive along rim through Malapert
chaotic debris field near base of plateau • Stop 1 at edge of Malapert Crater debris field, gateway to upsloping outer ring rampart ‘plateau’ including
site survey, structural analysis, rock and subsurface sampling. Drive to Malapert Rim • Stop 2 at Malapert Crater rim, rampart cliffs, work as Stop 1. Drive to highest point on plateau • Stop 3 for survey and structural analysis, rock sampling, experiment package deployment. Drive to steep
edge of Malapert Crater rim • Stop 4 on opposite side Malapert Crater, work as Stop 1. Drive to bottom of plateau and another crater rim • Stop 5 at edge of that crater, work as before
– Day 3: Edge of Malapert Mountain Rampart to Shackleton
Modeling What-If’s ILIADS Path Planning
Modeling What-If’s LSOS Simulation
• Data gaps influence simulated path
• Variation between “planned/desired” path & possible path
• More like “Orienteering”
22
Example of Surface Exploration Summary
22 22 22 22
Degree to Which Investigations are Potentially Addressed in Campaign
23
24
• Payload/Instrument Point of Contact
• Payload/Instrument Concept Name
• Applicable NRC Lunar Science Goals
• Science objectives
• Type of Instrumentation/Sensor (e.g. spectrometer, imaging, magnetometer, etc.)
• Measurements
• Site Requirements
• Operations
• Redeployment
• Modes of use
• Positioning Requirements
• Pointing or Orientation Requirements
• Vibration Requirements/Concerns
• Contamination (dust, particle) Requirements/Concerns
• Astronaut Time Required for Deployment
• Mass and Volume
• Power System
• Power Profile
• Thermal Design
• Commanding
• Data Rate/Volume
• Mission Life/Operational Duration
• Technology
• Serviceability
Instrument/Payload Characteristics
Payloads and Laboratories
Payload Type Description Mass (kg) Manifest Delivery
Documentation Cameras, Navigation and tracking, interactive planning and documentation 35 Available for each Human
Mission
GeoTools Geology sampling and survey tools, geochemical and geotechnical instruments
135 1 plus a spare for each LER
Subsurface Tools (SUB) Subsurface penetration tools; drills, EM sounder, GPR, gravimeter 65 1 plus a spare for each
LER
Combined Expendables All expendables 100 Available for each Human Lander
Environmental Monitoring Package
Charged particle, field, dust, radiation instruments 150 1 deployed from
Shackleton
Interior Monitoring Package
Geophysical instruments (seismic, eat flow, magnetometer, reflectometer) 150 2 deployed from
Shackleton
Lab-in-Hab Petrographic microscope, SEM, rock slice and section, sieve, meters and spectrometers
185 1 plus spare for each Hab and 1 plus spare for each logistics module
Observatory Sun, Earth, cosmic observation packages 250 As mass becomes
available
25 25
interactive planning and documentation 35 Available for each Human Mission
135 1 plus a spare for each LER
65 1 plus a spare for each LER
100 Available for each Human Lander
Charged particle, field, dust, radiation 150 1 deployed from Shackleton
Geophysical instruments (seismic, eat 150 2 deployed from Shackleton
185 1 plus spare for each Hab and 1 plus spare for each logistics module
250 As mass becomes available
25 25 25 25
Geo
Lab
&
Bio
labs
Requirements
• Environment • Planetary Protection, Mars Forward • Lunar Sortie Missions • Human Research Program Mission Duration • Surface Mobility Range • Minimum Delivery Mass • Minimum Return Mass • Minimum Delivery Volume • Minimum Return Volume • Power • Communication • Data • Technology Development Needs
26
TO: [Ex-0072] The Constellation Architecture
shall allocate at least 250 (TBR-EARD- 047)
kg (551 lbm) of cargo return mass capability
per lunar mission to support science