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