Preliminary Planning for an International Mars Sample Return Mission iMARS Working Group

1. Preliminary Planning for an International Mars Sample Return Mission iMARS Working Group Presentation to IMEWG, July 8, 2008

2. This afternoon’s agenda

3. Introduction David Beaty

4. iMARS’ Objective • Produce a plan for an internationalized MSR From the iMARS* Terms of Reference (source: IMEWG) “The overarching goal of this activity is to identify how international cooperation might enable sample return from Mars, document the existing state-of-knowledge on return of samples from Mars, develop international mission architecture options, identify technology development milestones to accomplish a multi-national mission, and determine potential collaboration opportunities within the architecture and technology options and requirements, and current Mars sample return mission schedule estimates of interested nations. The activity will also identify specific national interests and opportunities for cooperation in the planning, design, and implementation of mission-elements that contribute to sample return. The Working Group’s final product(s) is expected to be a potential plan for an internationally sponsored and executed Mars sample return mission.” *International Mars Architecture for the Return of Samples

5. iMARS—The Team 31 primary participants, originating from three sources. Within team discussions, all participants treated equally NOTE: Participation was nominated by national agencies.

6. iMARS’ Functional Organization, Processes • Process Summary • Start Sept. 2007 • Quarterly full meetings • Lots of subteam telecon, e-mail, some subteam meetings • IMARS Leadership Team: Biweekly telecons • Steering Committee • David Parker, UK • Bruno Gardini, ESA • Doug McCuistion, NASA • IMARS co-chairs • David Beaty, USA • Monica Grady, UK • Engineering Subteam • Denis Moura, CNES/ASI • Facility/PP Subteam • Gerhard Kminek, ESA • Science Subteam • Monica Grady, UK Biweekly telecons Biweekly telecons • MEPAG ND-SAG • Lars Borg • Dave Des Marais • Dave Beaty CONCENTRATED TECHNICAL ANALYSES Weekly telecons

7. Mission Rationale, Science Objectives, Samples Needed to Achieve Objectives David Beaty

8. MSR Mission Rationale Mars Sample Return (MSR) is an important mission for science because: • Abouthalf of the currently proposed investigations of Mars (e.g. MEPAG’s list of 55 investigations) could be addressed by MSR • MSR is the single mission that would make the most progress towards the entire list. • A significant fraction of these investigations could not be meaningfully advanced without returned samples. • Mars meteorites are useful for some, but not all Mars questions. • many key sample types are not represented • The Mars meteorites are from unknown localities on Mars—the absence of sample context limits possible interpretation. • After the recent phase of remote sensing observation from orbit (ODY, Mars Express, MRO), and the on-going surface missions (MER, Phoenix, MSL, ExoMars), the next step to make decisive advances in Mars exploration and prepare human missions is to analyze samples on the Earth with the most advanced techniques

9. Why Return Samples? There are three primary reasons why MSR would be of such high value to science. 1. Complex sample preparation, sample decisions Image courtesy Dimitri Papanastassiou Image courtesy Carl Allen

10. Why Return Samples? 2. Analysis Adaptability 3. Instrumentation • Not limited by prior hypotheses • Best accuracy/precision • Diversity—results could be confirmed by alternate methods • Instruments not limited by mass, power, V, T, reliability, etc. • Calibration, positive and negative control standards • Future instrument developments UCLA MegaSIMS lab, courtesy Kevin McKeegan …. JSC TEM lab, courtesy Lisa Fletcher

11. Relationship between Candidate Science Objectives and Sample Types

12. Some Key Attributes of the Sample Collection • Samples organized in suites • Minimum necessary sample size/mass • Minimum necessary number of samples • Sample preservation needs (chemical, mechanical, and thermal)

13. Suites of samples are needed Karatepe • MSR would have its greatest value if the samples are organized into suites that represent the diversity of the products of various planetary processes. • Similarities and differences between samples in a suite could be as important as the absolute characterization of a single sample • The minimum number for a suite of samples is thought to be 5-8 samples. Endurance Crater, July 19, 2004 (Opportunity Sol 173) Clark et al., 2005 (EPSL)

14. Sample size/mass • The decision on sample size would be a trade between individual sample mass and total number of samples. • If the samples are too small, a given sample could not be subdivided enough to meet the array of measurement and archiving requirements. • If the samples are too big, their total number would be too small to satisfy minimum requirements for the diversity of the entire collection. • Based on experience with Lunar and meteorite samples, iMARS has concluded that 10 grams per rock sample is a reasonable compromise. Case History: Martian meteorite QUE-94201 (mass = 12.02 g) QUE-94201 QUE has been subdivided into over 60 individual samples, and analyzed by multiple laboratories. Image courtesy Kevin Righter

15. Model of Minimum Number and Mass of Samples

16. Sample Preservation, Integrity, and Labeling • Integrity of the samples must be preserved • Samples must be labelled (to link to field context) • Retain pristine nature of samples prior to arrival on Earth (including temp.) • Samples would require secure and appropriate packaging to ensure that samples do not become mixed or contaminated UNACCEPTABLE Rock sample pulverized Samples mixed ACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE Images courtesy Joy Crisp Impact test, June 8, 2000 (max. dynamic load ~ 3400 g, avg. ~2290 g). 10 samples of basalt and chalk in separate sample cache tubes with tight-fitting Teflon caps. Many of the teflon caps came off as a result of the impact. Rock fractured

17. Science Strategy and Implementation Monica Grady

18. Sampling Strategy • Achieving the scientific objectives of MSR would be critically dependent on the samples collected • Sample collection mechanism must be able to: • reach specified samples • collect different types of material • rock samples, granular materials (regolith, dust) and atmospheric sample(s) • single cores to depths of ~5 cm below the surface • Would require mobility, moving from landing site to sampling site(s) • Ability to rove beyond its landing site, carry out a sample-acquisition traverse, and return to the lander • Rover must be able to visit multiple locations within a single landing site Opportunity Landing Site

19. Scientific Sample Selection • Effective sample selection would require: • sufficient knowledge of characteristics of candidate samples • field context of the samples • Several measurements made in situ would aid in identifying samples for collection, and would add value to the collected samples by providing context

20. Sample Types: Rocks SEDIMENTARY IGNEOUS Melas Chasma Humphrey Endurance Crater Upper unit Backstay Middle unit Lower unit Irvine Elizabeth Mahon: 72% SiO2 HYDROTHERMAL Images courtesy Hap McSween, John Grotzinger

21. Sample Acquisition 1: Rock Samples • In order to maximize the scientific value of rock samples, the rover-based sample acquisition system should be able to: • Take samples from outcrops where the geologic context is well-known, and also from loose rocks of interest. • Sample both the weathered exterior and unweathered interior. • Sample specific sites (e.g. designated beds within a stratigraphic sequence, such as the Burns Cliff at Meridiani Planum). • Deliver samples of an appropriate size and form • Sampling • A “mini-corer” capable of accessing unweathered terrains and acquiring small samples. • Current estimate of minimum required depth is ~5 cm (TBC) RAT on Opportunity Image courtesy Steve Ruff

22. Sample Types: Regolith Soil with a salty chemistry dominated by iron-bearing sulfates. These salts may record the past presence of water. Spirit, 01-12-06; sol 721 “Ordinary” regolith Basaltic sand Soil target “El Dorado“, Spirit Sol114A_P2561_1_True_RAD.jpg Soil target "Gertrude Weise“, Spirit, March 29, 2007; sol 1187 Most patches of disturbed, bright soil in Gusev are rich in sulfur, but this one has very little sulfur and is about 90 percent silica. Images courtesy Steve Ruff and Oded Aharonson

23. Sample Acquisition: Regolith and Dust Sol589A_P2559_1_False_L257.jpg • Regolith/dust samples • Need an effective way to collect granular materials (e.g., scoop) For Opportunity, the estimated net dust thickness after one year was 1 to 10 microns (reflects both additions and removal). Image courtesy Steve Ruff False-color Pancam image that shows thin dust drifts at the top of Husband Hill.

24. Sample Acquisition: Atmosphere • Atmospheric gas sample sufficient gas for robust analyses • Gas sample must be isolated from the rock, regolith, and dust samples • Minimum ~ 10 cm3 at a pressure of 0.5 bar (probably requires compression of gas sample) Gas Analysis Sample Container (GASC) used on Apollo 11 and 12 to sample lunar atmospheric gases.    JSC gas analysis lab (Image courtesy Don Bogard)

25. MSR Landing Site Selection Nili Fossae Trough • The choice of landing site would play a critical role in determining which of these objectives, and the level of detail, could be supported. • We need to start preparing for landing site selection now, while valuable orbital assets are functional. • Trade-off between ease of access and scientific value • ±30° latitude would allow for a wide variety of targets • Special regions judged not to be necessary to achieve minimum acceptable science. Image courtesy Scott Murchie

26. Science Management Plan Monica Grady

27. Planning for Sample Science • A significant challenge for an international MSR would be the process by which a large, diverse, international science team would be managed • How would international participation in the following critical science-related decisions be managed? EXAMPLE SCIENCE DECISION: Sub-division and allocations for part of Mars meteorite QUE-94201 • where to land, • which samples to collect, • Mars surface operations strategy, and its relationship to risk management • subdivision of the samples once back on Earth • allocation of the samples • Would require an international ‘oversight body’ that includes • international and technical diversity • budget decision-makers • scientists, engineers, strategic planners, and managers • Proposal for International MSR Science Institute (IMSI)

28. Proposed MSR Science Process Roadmap 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MAV launch LanderLaunch Earth Arrival SRF Ground breaking SRF Site(s) selection Strategic guidance, oversight IMSI Public Outreach POWG Landing Site selection and certification LSWG SOWG Surface Operations and sample selection Sample Science, Preliminary examination SSWG Science Selection AO PIs CWG Curation transition/operations Sample allocation MSASC National entities would be involved in curation, instrument development, laboratory upgrades, sample management and analysis technology

29. DISCUSSION

30. Draft High-Level Requirements Lisa May

31. Draft High-Level Requirements

32. Draft High-Level Requirements (Cont’d)

33. Reference MSR Architecture Alain Pradier

34. Proposed Reference MSR Architecture SEVERAL KEY FACTORS SET THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE PROPOSED MSR ARCHITECTURE • No direct return to Earth from Mars surface • must split flight mission at some point  creating 2 flight elements • Current launcher capability • 1 launch of both flight elements not currently possible  2 launchers • Mass domino effect • Two key elements, Earth return capsule and Mars ascent vehicle, lie at the end of long delta-V chains  the masses of these elements are critical drivers of the overall mission 1 2 split

35. Launch & Transfer Proposed MSR Architecture - Launch Mars Surface Mars Atmosphere Mars Orbit Earth Orbiter Composite Ariane 5 ECA (candidate) Lander Composite Atlas A 551 (candidate) Control & Mission Centres and Stations

36. Proposed MSR Architecture - Arrival Mars Surface Entry, Descent & Landing Mars Atmosphere Entry & Descent Stage, Direct Entry Mars Cruise Stage Mars Orbit Orbiter (Aerobraking) Earth Orbiter Composite Ariane 5 ECA (candidate) Lander Composite Atlas A 551 (candidate) Orbiter Aerobraking (NASA-MRO shown) Control & Mission Centres and Stations

37. Proposed MSR Architecture - Surface Mars Surface Surface Sampling Operations Mars Sampling Rover Mars Lander Mars Atmosphere Mars Ascent Vehicle Entry & Descent Stage, Direct Entry Mars Cruise Stage Mars Orbit Orbiter (Aerobraking) Mars Ascent Vehicle Launch Earth Orbiter Composite Ariane 5 ECA (candidate) Lander Composite Atlas A 551 (candidate) Control & Mission Centres and Stations

38. Earth Return & Deflection of Return Vehicle Rendezvous & Sample Container Capture Proposed MSR Architecture - Return Mars Surface Mars Sampling Rover Mars Lander Mars Atmosphere Mars Ascent Vehicle Entry & Descent Stage, Direct Entry Mars Cruise Stage Expended MAV Sample Container Mars Orbit Orbiter Captures Sample Container Orbiter (Aerobraking) Expended Propulsion Module Diverted ERV Earth Return Vehicle Earth Orbiter Composite Ariane 5 ECA Lander Composite Atlas A 551 Sample Receiving and Curation Facilities Control & Mission Centres and Stations

39. High Speed Earth Entry Proposed MSR Architecture– Earth Entry & Recovery Mars Surface Mars Sampling Rover Mars Lander Mars Atmosphere Mars Ascent Vehicle Entry & Descent Stage, Direct Entry Mars Cruise Stage Expended MAV Sample Container Mars Orbit Orbiter Captures Sample Container Orbiter (Aerobraking) Expended Propulsion Module Diverted ERV Earth Return Vehicle Earth Orbiter Composite Ariane 5 ECA (candidate) Lander Composite Atlas A 551 (candidate) Earth Entry Vehicle Control & Mission Centres and Stations Sample Receiving and Curation Facilities

40. Mission Analysis Frank Jordan

41. Sample Return Mission Studies Background •1998-1999 Partnership: NASA, CNES, ASI for mission launch in 2003-2005 • 2000-2006 NASA studies with U.S. industry • 2003-2007 ESA studies with European industry • 2007-2008 IMARS study iMARS study has built on the past studies and has reached a consensus on reference mission design features

42. Mission Design Issues / Design Assumptions

43. Lander composite launched in 2020 Lander launched in 2022 Analysis of MSR Mission Options (Lander TC from MSR orbiter) Abbreviations: A/b: aerobraking; DT: Direct Transfer (no Earth swing-by); RdV: Rendezvous and Capture; IFO: In-flight operations.

44. Lander composite launched in 2018, before the Orbiter composite Lander launched in 2020, before the Orbiter composite Lander launched in 2020, after the Orbiter composite Analysis of MSR Mission Options (Lander TC from another mission) The one considered later on

45. •Entry System • Parachute • Propulsive descent system Landing Accuracy (1 of 2)

46. Entry Phase Parachute Phase Unguided (MER, Phoenix, Exomars): # 50 km radius Chute Deploy ~3km Ignition Pwred Desc (Gravity Turn) Ignition Ballistic guided entry phase (MSL): # 10 km radius MSL 2009 System Triggers chute deployment on speed Entry Phase Ballistic guided entry phase and optimised parachute opening (enhanced MSL): # 3 km radius Chute Phase Chute Deploy ~ 3km Pwred Desc (Gravity Turn) Improved accuracy, triggers chute Deploymemt on position Landing Accuracy (2 of 2) Capabilities vs concepts

47. Holden Crater: Candidate MSL Site Sampling Strategy Impact on Science Area of Sampling Interest MSL MSR

48. Surface Exploration for “Go To” Sites A: Petal architecture • 700 sols B: Linear architecture • 385 sols 50m 500m Science suites (5 cores per suite) A Lander & MAV Cores B Landing accuracy, 0 to 3kmsemi-major axis of the landing ellipse Smooth terrain 100 m/sol traverse Rough terrain 35 m/sol traverse

49. Protecting the Earth, Mars, and the Samples Gerhard Kminek

50. Planetary Protection Policy Preserve planetary conditions for future biological exploration – avoid forward contamination To protect Earth and its biosphere from potential harmful extraterrestrial sources of biological contamination – avoid backward contamination