The Apollo mission returned 382 kg of rocks, soil and core samples, which have helped to advance our knowledge of lunar science. Studies of these lunar samples are crucial for our understanding of the Moons geological evolution. Here, we present the meticulous process that involves preparing for, and ultimately opening, the unopened Apollo 17 drive tube: 73002,0, so that the next generation of lunar scientists can further our insight into the Moons history

Allton, J. H.

Gross, J.

Krysher, C. H.

McCubbin, F. M.

Mosie, A. B.

Zeigler, R. A.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

ADVENTURES IN LUNAR CORE PROCESSING: TIMELINE OF AND PREPARATION FOR OPENING 
OF CORE SAMPLE 73002 FOR THE ANGSA PROGRAM.  C.H. Krysher1, A.B. Mosie2, J. Gross3,4,5,6, R.A. 
Zeigler3, F.M. McCubbin3, J.H. Allton3, and the ANGSA science team. 1HX5 – Jacobs JETS Contract, NASA Johnson 
Space Center, Houston, TX 77058 (charis.h.krysher@nasa.gov); 2GeoControl Systems - Jacobs JETS Contract, NASA 
Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058; 3NASA, Johnson Space Center, Mail Code X12, Houston, TX, 77058; 
4Dept. of Earth & Planetary Sciences, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854; 5Dept. of Earth & Planetary 
Sciences, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY 10024; 6Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, TX 
77058. 
 
Introduction:  The Apollo mission returned 382 kg 
of rocks, soil and core samples, which have helped to 
advance our knowledge of lunar science. Studies of 
these lunar samples are crucial for our understanding of 
the Moon’s geological evolution. Here, we present the 
meticulous process that involves preparing for, and 
ultimately opening, the unopened Apollo 17 drive tube: 
73002,0, so that the next generation of lunar scientists 
can further our insight into the Moon’s history.  
Summer 2018 – T minus 18 months:  First, all core 
processing equipment was pulled out of storage and 
sorting through to identify all tools and equipment by 
cross-referencing the procedures and previous processor 
experiences. The core cabinet was cleaned and purged 
with nitrogen gas (GN2) to prepare it for use after sitting 
dormant for nearly 25 years. Numerous challenges arose 
during this process; e.g., very few items were labeled, 
part numbers were misidentified in the procedure, 
naming convention was not consistent, and few photos 
existed for individual components. Furthermore, 
legions of screws were bagged separately from their 
respective equipment, many of which were Xylan 
coated, a material that is non-compliant for pristine 
lunar processing 
[1]. Moreover, 
there is limited 
institutional 
memory as most 
of the former core 
processors have 
retired or passed 
away. 
Fall 2018 – T 
minus 12 months:  
The first of several 
table-top assembly 
rehearsals began 
with a mixture of 
experienced and 
new core 
processors. The 
goal of these 
sessions was two-
fold: (1) identify 
equipment and (2) 
learn how it fits together. Several dry runs were 
completed with varying degrees of success (Fig. 1a) – 
parts continued to be identified and future challenges 
were noted.  
Many of the fused silica receptacle tops (commonly 
called the quartz tops) had been damaged during past 
use, leaving only one intact and no source identified for 
manufacturing a new one. 
May 2019 – T minus 5 months: The practice was 
split into two phases. Phase one involved practicing 
assembly and extrusion on a table top with the same 
dimensions as the core cabinet footprint. Phase two 
involved the practice of assembly, extrusion, and 
dissection of a lunar core simulant (Fig. 2a) inside a 
mockup glove box (Fig. 1a). This allowed us to become 
familiar with the constraints inside a glovebox, as well 
as working with a simulant similar to the core soil.  
In the meantime, the lunar core simulant was 
designed, and several epoxies were examined for 
encapsulation of the core remainder for the formation of 
thin sections. 
July 2019 – T minus 4 months:  Phase two 
commenced in July 2019. A mockup core cabinet with 
Fig. 1: Process of opening 73002 from dry-runs (a) to loading the core cabinet (b) to fully loaded 
cabinet (c) and final extrusion (d). 
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20200001871 2020-05-24T04:11:24+00:00Z
the same dimensions as the original core cabinet was 
designed and built. This set up allowed for practice 
assembly, extrusion, and dissection within the 
constraints of a glovebox without concern about 
cleanroom protocol. 
During this time, we also discovered that the keeper 
removal assembly, which is required to remove the 
keeper from the drive tube to allow the core sample to 
be extruded, was missing a vital part that could not be 
located. A successful hunt was initiated to find a 
manufacturer who could fabricate the part with a short 
turn around. 
August/September 2019 – T minus 2 months:  We 
commenced the equipment assembly and extrusion, first 
using Teflon blocks to simulate the core in the mockup 
glovebox. During this time, we identified which 
assembly steps could take place outside the actual 
cabinet. The assembly steps would be performed after 
the cleaning process but before the equipment was 
bagged for transport to the lab. This cut down on the 
time and effort needed during equipment assembly in 
the actual glovebox. 
Two practice core drive tubes were filled with the 
lunar core simulant: one for use during extrusion 
practice sessions and one used as the test subject for CT 
scanning prior to the actual scan of 73002,0. During the 
first practice extrusion session, the practice drive tube 
was filled fully (roughly 30 cm). During the second 
practice extrusion session, the practice drive tube was 
only filled to about 23 cm to better simulate the actual 
length of the 73002,0 core. 
October 2019 – T minus 1 month: During the final 
extrusion session, a different quartz top in use was 
damaged due to complacency and inattention during the 
extrusion. Lesson learned. 
As part of the prep work to get the core cabinet ready 
for action, lights, a webcam, webcam rack and power 
box from a different lunar cabinet were disassembled 
and retrofitted onto the core cabinet. This turned out to 
be a bigger project than originally intended, since the 
lights, camera, power box, and rack were fully 
integrated with one another. 
Additionally, the current tool and equipment 
cleaning procedure was modified to include the new 
cleanliness and sterility requirements for the opening of 
73002,0. This included blowing off all equipment with 
GN2 prior to a wipe-down with IPA wipes to remove all 
simulant alumina. Items were then cleaned per the 
normal procedure and then bagged in two Teflon inner 
bags and one polyethylene outer bag to minimize 
contamination. 
73002,0 was transported to the University of Texas 
at Austin for CT scanning during this month, along with 
the practice tube filled with core simulant.  
November 2019 – Launch:  After equipment was 
cleaned, we assembled everything we could on the table 
top prior to final bagging. Witness plates and foil were 
prepared and deployed in the core cabinet prior to 
insertion of any other equipment. 
The equipment loading procedure was modified to 
minimize biological contamination This included 
donning a clean smock over the cleanroom bunny suit, 
donning clean nitrile gloves prior to picking up and 
loading equipment into the airlock, and wiping down the 
inside of the cabinet airlock with IPA wipes prior to 
loading equipment (being careful not to brush against 
the inside of the airlock while reaching inside). 
Loading the core equipment and tools into the 
airlock took two full days and a full crew on board (Fig. 
1b). Assembly of the equipment inside the cabinet took 
about a day (Fig. 1c), and extrusion was successful and 
yielded no surprises. The extrusion was videotaped via 
our webcam and a NASA photographer (Fig. 1d). 
 
Post-November 2019:  We continue the dissection 
of the 73002,0 (Fig. 2b), working with ANGSA science 
team members to document the process and to extract 
the most information from the processing of this sample 
for future core extrusions. 
Acknowledgments:  ARES Curation Technician 
team, Jeremy Kent, Dr. Kimberly Allums-Spencer, 
Carla Gonzales, Melissa Rodriguez, Dr. Cecilia Amick, 
Thomas Cowden, Darren Locke, Amanda Gaspard, Dr. 
Andrea Harrington, Carol Schwartz, and Steve 
Karamitsos from Karatech, Inc. 
References: [1] Wright I. P., et al. (1992). Proc. of 
Lunar and Planetary Science, Vol 22 22, 449-458. 
Fig. 2: Lunar simulant core during dry-run with 
simulated quartz beads representing clasts and 
rocklets (a); Extruded lunar core sample 73002,0 
during dissection of pass 1. 


Adventures in Lunar Core Processing: Timeline of and Preparation for Opening of Core Sample 73002 for the ANGSA Program

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server