Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 56 – uploaded by Ryan L Kobrick

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 58: Surface defect indicated by arrow on left hand side of scratch profile (LOS0SAM106SCRO03V2) um. Even with a sensitive code, the boundary conditions would detect this as the edge.

Figure 58 Surface defect indicated by arrow on left hand side of scratch profile (LOS0SAM106SCRO03V2) um. Even with a sensitive code, the boundary conditions would detect this as the edge.

Related Figures (82)

‘able 2: Significant Lunar Minerals [Rickman, 2008a] ...............00.
‘able 2: Significant Lunar Minerals [Rickman, 2008a] ...............00.
Figure 1: Themes of the Global Exploration Strategy [modified from Allen, 2008]
Figure 1: Themes of the Global Exploration Strategy [modified from Allen, 2008]
Figure 2: (left) Astronaut Jack Schmitt covered in lunar dust, Apollo 17 [Phillips, 2006] Figure 3: (right) Astronaut Gene Cernan in lunar module Challenger with dust on forehead and long johns, Apollo 17 [Phillips, 2006]
Figure 2: (left) Astronaut Jack Schmitt covered in lunar dust, Apollo 17 [Phillips, 2006] Figure 3: (right) Astronaut Gene Cernan in lunar module Challenger with dust on forehead and long johns, Apollo 17 [Phillips, 2006]
Figure 4: Earth-Moon orbital alignment with respect to the Sun [used with permission, Heiken, 1991] 2.4.5), and the relative micrometeorite bombardment (chapter 2.3.6).
Figure 4: Earth-Moon orbital alignment with respect to the Sun [used with permission, Heiken, 1991] 2.4.5), and the relative micrometeorite bombardment (chapter 2.3.6).
* The far side of the Moon is closer to the sun at noon than nearside, so it gets ~1% more solar energy. + Average temperature has a yearly variation that makes it very cold (T < 200 K) for several weeks. Table 1: Estimated lunar surface temperatures [adapted from Heiken, 1991]
* The far side of the Moon is closer to the sun at noon than nearside, so it gets ~1% more solar energy. + Average temperature has a yearly variation that makes it very cold (T < 200 K) for several weeks. Table 1: Estimated lunar surface temperatures [adapted from Heiken, 1991]
Figure 5: The fundamental lunar regions include the basaltic-rich maria and feldspar-rich highlands [adapted from Lang, 2003].
Figure 5: The fundamental lunar regions include the basaltic-rich maria and feldspar-rich highlands [adapted from Lang, 2003].
Table 2: Significant Lunar Minerals [Rickman, 2008a]
Table 2: Significant Lunar Minerals [Rickman, 2008a]
Figure 6: Lunar dust formation [used with permission, Taylor, 2004]
Figure 6: Lunar dust formation [used with permission, Taylor, 2004]
*Most single-mineral grains are plagioclase, pyroxene, and olivine. Abundances do not add up to 100% because unidentified and minor constituents are not listed. The weighted average for the whole sample is given in the right column. Table 3: Volume abundances of particles by particle size in Lunar Soil 15601,96 [adapted from Colwell, 2007]
*Most single-mineral grains are plagioclase, pyroxene, and olivine. Abundances do not add up to 100% because unidentified and minor constituents are not listed. The weighted average for the whole sample is given in the right column. Table 3: Volume abundances of particles by particle size in Lunar Soil 15601,96 [adapted from Colwell, 2007]
Figure 7: Cross section of lunar near-surface materials to a depth of 25 km [used with permission, Heiken, 1991] 2.4.3 Human Safety
Figure 7: Cross section of lunar near-surface materials to a depth of 25 km [used with permission, Heiken, 1991] 2.4.3 Human Safety
Table 4: Mechanical properties of lunar regolith [adapted from Colwell, 2007]
Table 4: Mechanical properties of lunar regolith [adapted from Colwell, 2007]
Figure 8: Lunar dust agglutinate particle [used with permission from D. McKay, Allton, 1995]
Figure 8: Lunar dust agglutinate particle [used with permission from D. McKay, Allton, 1995]
Figure 9: The lunar electrodynamic environment [David, 2006] mission durations compared to the relative short surface stays during the Apollo era.
Figure 9: The lunar electrodynamic environment [David, 2006] mission durations compared to the relative short surface stays during the Apollo era.
2.4.8 Lunar Regolith Simulants Table 5: Lunar dust chemical composition [adapted from Plescia, 2008] missions returned 321 g (1969-1976) [Colwell, 2007 and Todd, 2008]. Because of the limited
2.4.8 Lunar Regolith Simulants Table 5: Lunar dust chemical composition [adapted from Plescia, 2008] missions returned 321 g (1969-1976) [Colwell, 2007 and Todd, 2008]. Because of the limited
testing plastics, metals, ceramics, and composites, while Three-body testing is used for all
testing plastics, metals, ceramics, and composites, while Three-body testing is used for all
Figure 12: Simplified abrasive wear model showing how a cone removes material from a surface [adapted from Rabinowicz, 1995]
Figure 12: Simplified abrasive wear model showing how a cone removes material from a surface [adapted from Rabinowicz, 1995]
Figure 13: (left) Schematic of the loop abrasion test [Reprinted, with permission ', Budinski, 2005] Figure 14: (right) Scar volume for sector of a cylinder [Reprinted, with permission ', Budinski, 2005]
Figure 13: (left) Schematic of the loop abrasion test [Reprinted, with permission ', Budinski, 2005] Figure 14: (right) Scar volume for sector of a cylinder [Reprinted, with permission ', Budinski, 2005]
Table 8: Summary of relevant ASTM Standards for abrasion testing
Table 8: Summary of relevant ASTM Standards for abrasion testing
Figure 16: Characteristics and parameters relevant to laboratory tribotesting [adapted from ASTM, 1997] and relevant parameters of laboratory and simulative tests are shown in Figure 16.
Figure 16: Characteristics and parameters relevant to laboratory tribotesting [adapted from ASTM, 1997] and relevant parameters of laboratory and simulative tests are shown in Figure 16.
Figure 17: Wheel Abrasion Experiment on Sojourner engineering model at NASA Glenn Research Center [Photo: R.L. Kobrick]
Figure 17: Wheel Abrasion Experiment on Sojourner engineering model at NASA Glenn Research Center [Photo: R.L. Kobrick]
range of 50 — 200 N, it was desired to test in this range instead of conduct micro indentation.
range of 50 — 200 N, it was desired to test in this range instead of conduct micro indentation.
Figure 19: Spherical geometry of abrasive particle tip [adapted from Jiang, 1998] Equation 3-1: Spherical tip geometry relationships [Jiang, 1998]
Figure 19: Spherical geometry of abrasive particle tip [adapted from Jiang, 1998] Equation 3-1: Spherical tip geometry relationships [Jiang, 1998]
(from base to tip), and 1.0 mm thick.
(from base to tip), and 1.0 mm thick.
of their higher abundance on the Moon and higher Mohs hardness values. Figure 21: custom ruby spinel tip developed for two-body abrasion investigation
of their higher abundance on the Moon and higher Mohs hardness values. Figure 21: custom ruby spinel tip developed for two-body abrasion investigation
mention to avoid being overlooked in future application of this technique by others.
mention to avoid being overlooked in future application of this technique by others.
scratching, and are described by their radius dimensions (200 and 109 um) since the apex cone
scratching, and are described by their radius dimensions (200 and 109 um) since the apex cone
Table 9: Two-Body Abrasion Scratch Test Summary
Table 9: Two-Body Abrasion Scratch Test Summary
* Samples loaded at 5 and 10 N in closed chamber, others with chamber open (RH slowly increased) Table 10: Two-Body Abrasion Scratch Test Conditions
* Samples loaded at 5 and 10 N in closed chamber, others with chamber open (RH slowly increased) Table 10: Two-Body Abrasion Scratch Test Conditions
Table 11: NASA +CSEM Revetest Scratch Tester: User Instructions results. This procedure also acts as a guide for any future scratch testing that may be conducted
Table 11: NASA +CSEM Revetest Scratch Tester: User Instructions results. This procedure also acts as a guide for any future scratch testing that may be conducted
Figure 24: Top view of materials illustrating the potential for equal scratch width measurements to be made for varying volumetric displacement results. Width is used in ASTM Standard G 171 to define two-body abrasion from scratch testing [ASTM, 2003, Courtesy of P.J. Blau, Oak Ridge National Laboratory]. materials (see Figure 24).
Figure 24: Top view of materials illustrating the potential for equal scratch width measurements to be made for varying volumetric displacement results. Width is used in ASTM Standard G 171 to define two-body abrasion from scratch testing [ASTM, 2003, Courtesy of P.J. Blau, Oak Ridge National Laboratory]. materials (see Figure 24).
Figure 25: Standardizing scratch width location and offset 3.6.1 Measurement Confidence Interval
Figure 25: Standardizing scratch width location and offset 3.6.1 Measurement Confidence Interval
Figure 26: Left hand side of scratch data showing confidence interval using surface roughness (Ra)
Figure 26: Left hand side of scratch data showing confidence interval using surface roughness (Ra)
Figure 28: Scratch width versus load (6 scratches, 18 Profiles) showing standard deviations
Figure 28: Scratch width versus load (6 scratches, 18 Profiles) showing standard deviations
whether this is an artifact of material removal. Figure 29: Data from diamond tip (36 scratches, 108 profiles) and custom anorthositic tip (12 scratches, 3¢ profiles) with theoretical sphere tip data of width versus depth measurements have a greater range of values. This should be further investigated to determin
whether this is an artifact of material removal. Figure 29: Data from diamond tip (36 scratches, 108 profiles) and custom anorthositic tip (12 scratches, 3¢ profiles) with theoretical sphere tip data of width versus depth measurements have a greater range of values. This should be further investigated to determin
Figure 30: Scratch width versus normal load (36 scratches, 108 profiles)
Figure 30: Scratch width versus normal load (36 scratches, 108 profiles)
Figure 33: Side view of typical scratch profile cross-section with location of Zeroline indicated.
Figure 33: Side view of typical scratch profile cross-section with location of Zeroline indicated.
Figure 34: Side view of ideal scratch and perfect surface Zeroline. considered for this analysis, but could be further assessed using a form of x-ray crystallography.
Figure 34: Side view of ideal scratch and perfect surface Zeroline. considered for this analysis, but could be further assessed using a form of x-ray crystallography.
height values that must be adjusted for proper analysis. Figure 35: Side View of tilted material may lead to incorrect measurements. specimen to be tilted while undergoing a surface scan. This would cause the data to have false
height values that must be adjusted for proper analysis. Figure 35: Side View of tilted material may lead to incorrect measurements. specimen to be tilted while undergoing a surface scan. This would cause the data to have false
Figure 36: Side view of surface roughness of material.
Figure 36: Side view of surface roughness of material.
Figure 37: Top view of two scratches on stainless steel 304 using different diamond tip dimensions with scalable width differences.
Figure 37: Top view of two scratches on stainless steel 304 using different diamond tip dimensions with scalable width differences.
Figure 38: 3D view of two scratches on stainless steel 304 using different diamond tip dimensions with different cross sections due to tip defects (scale is 1.2 mm left to right, 0.9 mm in depth, and 34 & 46 um vertical for 200 & 100 um tips respectably). Vertical axes are not to scale.
Figure 38: 3D view of two scratches on stainless steel 304 using different diamond tip dimensions with different cross sections due to tip defects (scale is 1.2 mm left to right, 0.9 mm in depth, and 34 & 46 um vertical for 200 & 100 um tips respectably). Vertical axes are not to scale.
software to correct its occurrence. must be taken to avoid the potential for this misalignment or incorporate the use of profilometry
software to correct its occurrence. must be taken to avoid the potential for this misalignment or incorporate the use of profilometry
detection would be desired to find the ZOI end points ignoring potholes or asperities.
detection would be desired to find the ZOI end points ignoring potholes or asperities.
* Calculated from an older version of MATLAB code that locates the scratch width as the ZL intercept with scratch slopes. Table 14: Case study data of new metrics on six profiles
* Calculated from an older version of MATLAB code that locates the scratch width as the ZL intercept with scratch slopes. Table 14: Case study data of new metrics on six profiles
Figure 43: Three profiles that have the same resultant width measurements, but are distinguishable by their different volume displacement metrics.
Figure 43: Three profiles that have the same resultant width measurements, but are distinguishable by their different volume displacement metrics.
Figure 44: Roughness parameter data for three profiles with the same width measurements.
Figure 44: Roughness parameter data for three profiles with the same width measurements.
scratch.
scratch.
Figure 46: Depth of penetration (Rv) from two different diamond tips abrading stainless steel 304. material coating penetration are not exceeded.
Figure 46: Depth of penetration (Rv) from two different diamond tips abrading stainless steel 304. material coating penetration are not exceeded.
Figure 48: Custom enstatite tip after breaking during scratch testing. The original tip shape is shown as black silhouette in the background. Magnification is 50x.
Figure 48: Custom enstatite tip after breaking during scratch testing. The original tip shape is shown as black silhouette in the background. Magnification is 50x.
Proposed New Standard Characterization of two-body abrasion analysis and the understanding of fundamental Table 15: Summary of improvements to current scratch standard
Proposed New Standard Characterization of two-body abrasion analysis and the understanding of fundamental Table 15: Summary of improvements to current scratch standard
Figure 49: Three-body abrasion tester (rotation direction indicated with curved arrow) with abrasive entry point on right side (indicated with straight arrow). The specimen sits at the bottom of the rotation wheel.
Figure 49: Three-body abrasion tester (rotation direction indicated with curved arrow) with abrasive entry point on right side (indicated with straight arrow). The specimen sits at the bottom of the rotation wheel.
Figure 50: Image of aluminum specimen after being abraded by alumina.
Figure 50: Image of aluminum specimen after being abraded by alumina.
Figure 51: Wear volume of PMMA abraded with new tribotester by various lunar simulants and abrasives.
Figure 51: Wear volume of PMMA abraded with new tribotester by various lunar simulants and abrasives.
Figure 52: Wear volume of metals abraded with new tribotester by various lunar simulants and abrasives.
Figure 52: Wear volume of metals abraded with new tribotester by various lunar simulants and abrasives.
Figure 53: SEM images of various abrasives. Top left: Alumina (50 1m diameter). Top right: AFS Silica (sand) 50/70 (200 um diameter). Bottom left: NU-LHT-2M simulant. Bottom right: JSC-1A-F (x1000). [Courtesy of Eunice K. Wong of ASRC Aerospace Corporation conducted at NASA GRC].
Figure 53: SEM images of various abrasives. Top left: Alumina (50 1m diameter). Top right: AFS Silica (sand) 50/70 (200 um diameter). Bottom left: NU-LHT-2M simulant. Bottom right: JSC-1A-F (x1000). [Courtesy of Eunice K. Wong of ASRC Aerospace Corporation conducted at NASA GRC].
Figure 54: Materials interacting directly with lunar dust
Figure 54: Materials interacting directly with lunar dust
two-body or three-body apparatus relevant to the specific interaction and loaded accordingly
two-body or three-body apparatus relevant to the specific interaction and loaded accordingly
Figure 56: The three fundamental dust zones of the spacecraft environment [adapted from NASA photo] properties (such as flexibility), power requirements and mass allocation.
Figure 56: The three fundamental dust zones of the spacecraft environment [adapted from NASA photo] properties (such as flexibility), power requirements and mass allocation.
Figure 57: Flow chart of all necessary inputs required to define an abrasion index the laboratory; and material selection for surface systems.
Figure 57: Flow chart of all necessary inputs required to define an abrasion index the laboratory; and material selection for surface systems.
Figure 59: Parametric study of edge detection conditions (distance used / number of points and multiplier)
Figure 59: Parametric study of edge detection conditions (distance used / number of points and multiplier)
Figure 60: Scratch profile before and after tilt removal
Figure 60: Scratch profile before and after tilt removal
Related topics:
Human SpaceflightSpace ExplorationLunar Dust
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved