NESS

Network of Environmental and Seismic Stations

NASA Solar System Roadmap

Objective 6

Understand the current state and evolution of the

ATMOSPHERE

, surface, and

INTERIOR

of Mars

Mars Exploration Program Goals

• Goal 1: Determine if Life ever arose • Goal 2: Characterize the Climate • Goal 3: Characterize the Geology • Goal 4: Prepare for Human Exploration

Mission Objective

• Determine the state and structure of the Martian interior and atmosphere using a network of stationary landers. • Assess geologic hazards and long-term variations in climate/radiation environment in preparation for human exploration

NESS Science Goals

• Current seismic activity – How active is Mars?

– Temporal and spatial distribution of Mars-quakes • Planet interior – Composition and properties of layers – Size and state of core • Global climate data – Global coverage from several meteorological stations – Concurrent data from 4 locations – Radiation & habitability for humans • Geology of landing site – Panoramic camera for context – Change in environment with the weather over the year

Science Objectives

Geophysics & Seismicity

1. Size and frequency of Mars-Quakes 2. Thickness and state of core, mantle, and crust 3. Variations of interior with latitude and longitude 4. Correlation of seismic activity with major geologic and tectonic features

Climate & Meteorology

1. Air pressure, temperature 2. Wind speed and direction Measurement Objectives Ideally, seismic measurements from 0.1mHz-100Hz and 0.1 1x10 -8 m/s 2 peak ground acceleration 3. UV Radiation Atmospheric pressure: 1 mbar-14mbars, temperature: 125-300K, Wind speed and direction: 0.1-100 m/s, UV: 200-400nm wavelength

Geologic & Geomorphic Context

1. Images of landing site 2. Changes in landscape and atmospheric opacity with seasons 3-color (RGB) stereo images at IFOV: 0.28 mrad at 1.5m to infinity. Subframed opacity measurements with 4th neutral density sun filter.

Instrumentation 1 (3-axis) Very Broad Band Seismometer (0.1mHz 10Hz), 1 (3-axis) short period, high frequency microseismometer (10Hz 100Hz).

4 Landers, good ground-coupling, 1 Earth year primary mission to maximize probability of Mars quake detection Continuous daytime collection and limited nightime collection of 3 component (X,Y,Z) seismograms from 2 seismometers on each lander (1) Phoenix or Mars Polar Lander-Type Meteorology Package including: thermocouple, barometer, anemometer and UV radiation sensor (1) MER-Type Panoramic camera Requirements 1 Earth year to track seasonal climatic variation at multiple locations Gimballed mast: 360 o azimuth range, +/- 90 o elevation range Data Products Continuous daytime collection and limited nightime collection of atmospheric measurements Image data

Mission Context

• Viking landed seismometers on Mars – Data noisy due to poor ground coupling – Determined upper limit on Mars seismicity • Meteorological data available from Viking and Pathfinder – Limited concurrent measurements, no global coverage • These missions have characterized surface

60 degree latitude, 360 degree longitude distribution Lander elevations are below -0.2km

30N, 135E 20N, 320E 5N, 205E 32S, 70E

Instrumentation

• Each lander will have: – Seismometers • Two Very Broad Band Seismometers • One Broad Band Seismometer • One Microseismometer – Barometer – Thermometer – Anemometer – Radiation sensor – Panoramic Camera – Microphone

Mission Design

• Trades and alternative designs – 6 landers versus 4 – Level of redundancy – Alternative landing sites – Entry of carrier

Mission Design Launch vehicle (type): Delta 2925H Flight schedule: liftoff Mars arrival L s Flight performance: trajectory C3 max payload max payload actual 25 Oct - 14 Nov 2011 12 Sep 2012 170 Type 2 10.7

1217.5 kg 983 kg

Launch Vehicle Configuration

Cruise Configuration

Carrier Only

• Bus total = 314.5

• Spacecraft total = 982.9

• Payload total = 612.3

• Launch vehicle mass margin = 234.6

EDL Only

• Bus total = 69.4

• Spacecraft total = 152.6

• 30%+ contingency • Entry system diameter = 1.2 m • Drag coefficient = 1.55

• Ballistic coefficient = 87.9kg/m 2

EDL Configuration

Lander Configuration

Lander Only

• Instrument mass + contingency = 5.5

• Total bus + contingency = 75.5

• Spacecraft total = 81.1

• 30%+ contingency • More time=better defined mass, ex drill/instruments

Meteorological Package (from Mars Polar Lander/MPF ) ~855g 855g http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/MPF/mpf/sci_desc.html#ATMO

360deg. Panorama Camera sharing the mast with Met package ~300g http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/MPF/mpf/sci_desc.html#IMP Microphone(50g, 5.2cm

× 5.2cm

× 1.3cm)

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/sixthmars2003/pdf/3078.pdf

Seismological Package (from NETLANDER mission by ESA/NASA) 1.75kg

VBB Axis (+BRB) JPL Axis 22-5mm,22-5mm,10mm × 3 10**-4-10Hz, 10**-2-10Hz Evacuated Sphere Very Broad Band Seismometer (VBB) ~800g MicroSeismometer(SP/NB) 22-5mm,22-5mm,10mm × 3 10-100Hz Resol:~10**-9 m/(s**2)/HZ**-1/2 ~100g http://ganymede.ipgp.jussieu.fr/GB/projects/netlander/sismo/

Data Return Strategy

TELECOM Hardware

A. Earth to Mars Transit • Redundant X-band Trans/Rec • 1 medium gain and 2 low gain antennae B. Entry, Decent, and Landing • Electralite Trans/Rec • • UHF, non-directional monopole Comms with MTO C. Landers • Electralite Trans/Rec • • UHF, non-directional monopole Comms with MTO

command data to S/C CDS telemetry data from S/C CDS command data to S/C CDS telemetry data from S/C CDS

SDST NESS CARRIER X-Band Downconverter X-Band Exciter TWTA X-band 35W, RF HYB Diplexer HYB WGTS CXS Ka-Band Exciter TWTA X-band 35W, RF SDST WGTS X-Band Exciter Ka-Band Exciter X-Band Downconverter

NESS LANDER Electra Lite

D I P L

NESS EDL UHF Monopole UHF Monopole cxs

X-band LGA X-band LGA

TELECOM Systems

• Optimal 128 kbps – Decrease transmit window, maximize data volume transfer – Average ~23 minute link per lander/SOL for 180 Mbits/SOL (avg. transfer capacity 315 Mbits/SOL) – Potential increase to 256 kbps with loss of total data volume received, but decrease in power consumption 58% 11% 14% 17% 38% 28% 18% 16% SOL 2 24% 25% 26% 25% SOL 1 Avg 10 SOLS

Ground Systems: DSN

• • • • Deep Space Network: Launch, track TCMs, cruise • Lander deployments (biggest cost) 24-hour coverage for 6 weeks • • Science operations (relay through MTO) Daily (1-hour) coverage in first month Weekly (1-hour) coverage for duration

Cruise-Phase Power

• A 2 m 2 fixed array powers the carrier – Supplies power to last lander for telecom, TCM’s, etc. – Charges lithium-ion lander batteries prior to separation • During 32-day separation phase, landers sleep – Timer circuit wakes controller just prior to EDL – EDL is powered by short-term thermal battery – Li-ion battery powers array deployment once landed

Lander Array

• Supplies instruments and controller day and night with 23-minute daily telecom – Daily energy usage ~330Wh • Landers are identical, so must design for worst-case latitude • Array is non-articulating because diffuse light limits benefit of orienting toward sun

Lander Array Power Estimation

daily solar incidence per m 2 during landed mission Orbital state (L S )     Minimum solar flux day Latitude • Driving power constraint is minimum solar energy for lander at 30N at L s = 270 (approx. 6 months after landing) – 1900 Wh/m 2 /sol, 30% power reduction from dust, 27% efficient cells – A 1.2 m 2 solar array (4 petals) gives a 30% contingency factor

Thermal Design Overview

Lander RHU 9 Temp Sensors 30 Mylar Blankets 7 Heaters 5 Thermo stat 5 EDL 0 30 15 10 20 Carrier 0 60 35 8 16 Need to keep instruments, parachutes, and propulsion tanks heated

• • • •

Command and Data Handling

• • • • • • • • Requirements for CDS: Data volume storage of 180 Mbits per sol for up to 8 days Data transfer rate to MTO (Mars Telecom Orbiter) at 128 kbps Data transfer rate between instruments and data storage average of 1 kbps (camera burst rate of10 Mbps) • • Modified I/O card interface between computer and I/O card Interface to instruments, power, propulsion, ACS (Attitude and Control Subsystem) elements, telecom, carrier separation interface & state of health to carrier Design assumptions of CDS is rad tolerant Total dose: 20-50 krad SEU (Single Event Upset) threshold LET: 20 MeV/mg/cm 2 SEU error rate: 10 -7 – 10 -8 bits per day Data storage capability (per lander): • 8 Gbits (includes data storage for missed pass) capable of storing up to 40 sols of data 2 landers will be capable of controlling cruise and EDL (Entry, Descent, and Landing) stages of mission

Attitude Control -- Carrier

•

Cruise stage

– Three-axis attitude control, with control electronics on landers. One lander is used, others are for redundancy.

– Eight sun sensors (coarse), for safe mode.

– Two star trackers (6 arcsec accuracy) – Two IMUs (inertial measuring unit), drift corrected by star trackers •

Lander deployment

– Attitude adjustments for lander deployment accurate to within 0.1

°. Each lander is spun up to 2 RPM with a spin table, and popped out using springs.

Attitude Control -- Landers

•

Three accelerometers to determine:

– When to deploy parachute – When the lander impacts Martian surface – Orientation after touchdown • • •

Carrier:

– $10,087,000

Lander:

– $477,000

Total:

– $10,564,000

ACS Costs

Public Engagement

Public Engagement

“Today, America has a serious shortage of young people entering the fields of mathematics and science. This critical part of NASA’s Mission is to inspire the next generation of explorers so that our work can go on. This educational mandate is an imperative .” - NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe Making Mars Real

Constructing a virtual experience as “psychologically real as someone’s backyard”

Sharing the Adventure

- N.E.S.S. - An opportunity for us

all

to explore.

Public Engagement

Education

• Formal-Learning experience inside classroom – Nationwide workshops for educators

(Teaching Teachers)

– Focus on Seismometry and Meteorology mission and science analogs.(K-12, college) – Provide mission related materials to educators for the generation of curriculums that follow national guidelines.

(Supporting Teachers)

• Informal-Learning experiences outside the classroom – Imagine Workshops – Science Seminars – Museum Partnerships – Youth Groups/Community Groups – Guest Observer Programs – Visualization/Imaging/Audio

An opportunity for us all to explore

Public Engagement

Outreach

• Public Outreach – Name the landers/sites participation –

The Mars Insider

Program: Daily Updates from N.E.S.S.(climate,weather, and sound) partnership with weather channels and programs – Public presentations (mission scientist and engineers) – Dynamic educational Website – Make-a-seismometer project (Mars vs. My Backyard)

An opportunity for us all to explore

Overall Mission Risk Matrix

5 4 L i k e i l h o o d 3 2 Tel:1 Ins:1, Sci:1 Sys:1 Pow:1, Sys:1, The:2 Sys:1 Sys:1 Sys:2 Cos:1, Ins:1, Pow:1, Sci:1, Sys:1 Ins:2, Mis:1, Pow:1, Str:1, Sys:2 Gro:1, Pow:1, Ris:1, Sys:3 Ins:2, Mis:1, Pow:1, Sys:1 EDL:2, Ins:3, Mis:3, Sof:1, Str:1, Sys:2 ACS:1, Sci:1, Sys:3, Tel:1 1 ACS:1, CDS:1, Ins:2, Pro:2, The:2 1 ACS:1, Pro:1 ACS:1, Mis:1, Sci:1, Sys:1, Tel:1 Mis:1, Sci:2, Str:1, Sys:3, Tel:2 ACS:3, Sci:2, Sof:1, Str:2, Sys:1 2 3 Impact 4 5

Major Risks to Mission Activities

• 26 risks have been identified. • 6 of the risks have been determined by many of the systems/disciplines to be critical to the mission.

– If don’t land on crushable material because of uncertain landing terrain, then severe damage to lander and loss of data (Impact – 4, Likelihood – 3) • Mitigation: Land in locations where terrain is most understood and fewest elevation changes (Impact - 4, Likelihood - 2) – Single string redundancy on the lander (Impact - 5, Likelihood – 2) • Mitigation: Determine which systems have the lowest reliability and either increase this reliability or add a redundant component (Impact 4, Likelihood - 1) – Seismometer can not take the large g-loads on landing (Impact – 5, Likelihood – 3) • Mitigation: Perform adequate testing to insure that instrument will withstand landing (Impact - 5, Likelihood - 1)

Major Risks to Mission Activities (continued)

– Failure to establish seismometer contact with the ground (Impact – 5, Likelihood - 3) • Mitigation: Increase reliability of ground contact mechanism (Impact - 5, Likelihood - 1) – Failure to handover CDS control of cruiser (with landers still attached) if primary control system fails (Impact - 5, Likelihood - 3) • Mitigation: Build into CDS an automatic handover of control to another landers processor if the primary CDS fails (Impact - 4, Likelihood - 2) – Loss of power because of dust build up on the landers systems, such as solar arrays (Impact - 4, Likelihood – 3) • Mitigation: More analysis needed to determine how much this will really effect the instruments

Project Schedule

Project Life Cycle

Phase Pre Phase A Advanced Studies Phase A Mission & System Definition Phase B Preliminary Design Phase C Design & Build Phase D Assembly Test & Launch Operations Phase E Operations Start Date Duration 11/14/08 4/16/09 9/15/10 12/14/10 1/5/12 12+ month instrument tech development 5 months 5 months 15 months 12 months 21 months Notes Descope saved 1 month Descope Saved 1 month

Organization Chart

NASA Program Office (NPO) Science Team Principal Investigator

- Algorithm Development - Science Data Reduction SW - Science Data System - Science Data Processing - Education & Outreach

Project Manager Safety & Mission Assurance JPL JPL Business Manager JPL

Mission Design Reqmts. Doc. Flight Sys I/Fs L/V I/Fs -

Project Systems Engineer JPL Advisory Board PI, Chair Dean, PI's U.

Dir For PFP, JPL VP, S/C IP

- Planning - Resource Analysis - Schedule Analysis - Earned Value Mgmt - Procurements

Mission Design Manager JPL

-Trajectory and Maneuver Design - Mission Activity Coordination - Mission and Navigation Plans

Instrument Manager JPL

- Instrument Design - Instrument Fabrication - Instrument I&T

Flight System Manager JPL

- Spacecraft Subcontracting & Fabrication & Integration - Flight System I&T - Operations Support

Mission Operations Manager JPL

- Ground System Development - Flight Operations - NASA Ground Station I/F

Work Breakdown Structure

1 2 WBS Levels

Proj Mgmt 01 Proj Sys Eng 02

3

Proj Mgmt 01.01

Proj Sys Eng 02.01

Mission Assurance 03 MA Mgmt 03.01

Business Mgmt 01.02

Risk Mgmt 01.03

Mission & Nav Dsgn 02.02

Proj SW Eng 02.03

Sys Safety 03.02

Environ Eng 03.03

4

Review Support 01.04

Facilities 01.05

Reserves 01.RE

eeis 02.04

Info Sys Eng & Comm 02.05

Config Mgmt 02.06

Planetary Protection 02.07

Launch Approval Eng 02.08

Launch System Eng 02.09

Project V&V 02.10

Reliability Eng 03.04

Parts Eng 03.05

QA Eng 03.06

SW IV&V 03.07

Mission Ops Assur 03.08

MARS Lander S.S. 2004-2008

NESS Science 04 Sci Mgmt 04.01

Payload Sys 05 PS Mgmt 05.01

FS Mgmt 06.01

Flight Sys 06 Reserved FS Modules 06.07 - 06.10

Mission Ops Sys 07 MOS Mgmt 07.01

Sci Implementation 04.02

Sci Support 04.03

PS Sys Eng 05.02

PS Prod Assur 05.03

FS Sys Eng 06.02

FS Prod Assur 06.03

FS Sys Testbeds 06.11

FS I&T 06.12

MOS Sys Eng 07.02

Gnd Data Sys 07.03

Educ & Pub Outreach 04.06

PS CC and M&P 05.04

FS CC and M&P 06.04

Inst 1 05.05

VBB Seismometer NEtlander Inst 2 05.06 (Contract) Micro Seismometer JPL Inst 3 05.07

GEO Phone Commercial Inst 4 05.08 - 05.19

MET Pack JPL Inst 5 05.20

Pan Cam ASU?

Common PS HW 05.31

FS Module 2 06.06 (Sys Contract) PS I&T 05.32

Inst MOS & GDS 07.04

Operations 07.05

MOS V & V 07.06

Launch Syst 08 Launch Services 08.01

NOTES 01.RE:

Includes all Project reserves as a non-WBS item.

05:

Use reserved elements 05.08 - 05.19 as needed for additional instruments and 05.21 - 05.29 as needed for additional technology payloads.

05.03 and 06.03:

Top level product assurance elements are used for system contracts providing more than one instrument or flight module

06.05:

Use the WBS elements in 06.05 as the template for Flight System Modules that are implemented in-house at JPL.

06.06

Use the WBS elements in 06.06 as the minimum template for Flight System Modules that are implemented as System Contracts.

Add selected WBS elements from 06.05 as needed for activities performed by JPL.

06.07 - 06.10

: Use reserved elements 06.07 - 06.10 as needed for addional Flight System Modules including Orbiters, Rovers, etc.

Cost Estimation Process

• Cost Chair requests data from all subsystems • The data are the parameters for equations in a cost model developed by Team X specialists using historical data • These data are run through the cost model and tabulated • The process is iterated until all subsystems are satisfied

Cost Assumptions

• Class B mission • Cost Dollars are FY 2004 • Inflation rate = 3.1% • We assumed a 97% learning curve for the landers and the EDL (Iearning curve equations incorporated into Team X models).

Expected Cost • $572 M Expected Cost

• There is no single huge cost driver. The cost is spread roughly evenly among the different subsystems.

• The upper estimated bound of the cost is $686 and the lower estimated bound is $515.

Cost Breakdown

Carrier Instruments Lander EDL ATLO Launch Vehicle Reserves Other

Mission Summary

• First global network of landers on Mars • Addresses NASA’s exploration goals • Lay foundation for forecasting hazards and weather change for human exploration

Thank You

• Team X • CoCo Karpinski and Anita Sohus • JPL employees and facility managers • PSSS