National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 3 Current Sample Return Missions and Near-Future Priorities Outlined in the Planetary Science Decadal Survey
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

4

Current Laboratories and Facilities

This chapter focuses on the following questions posed by the charge to the committee:

  • What laboratory analytical capabilities are required to support the NASA Planetary Science Division’s (and partners’) analysis and curation of existing and future extraterrestrial samples?
  • Which of these capabilities currently exist, and where are they located (including international partner facilities)?

4.1 RETRIEVAL, CURATION, AND CHARACTERIZATION OF RETURNED EXTRATERRESTRIAL SAMPLES

To understand the significance of existing infrastructure for sample curation and analysis and the tasks associated with retrieving the samples from the spacecraft, initial characterization and curation are first summarized (see Figure 4.1).1

  1. Recovery and initial triaging: Recovery from the field of sample return landing craft and delivery to an appropriate curatorial facility generally calls for procedures and equipment idiosyncratic to each mission and separate from permanent curation and analysis facilities. However, retrieving sample containers from that craft, initial handling and opening of those containers, and initial inspection of their contents will occur within facilities considered by this report. Key capabilities include environments and handling devices that carry minimal contamination, environments with controlled atmospheres and temperatures, and instruments for nondestructive inspection (e.g., optical microscopes).
  2. Sample description: Recovered samples must be described for their form (e.g., solid or gas), material properties (e.g., rock chips or powders), and size (volume and/or mass), and initial interpretations made regarding their general categorization (e.g., petrologic classification). These activities also commonly take place in a curatorial facility and call for various common, nondestructive or minimally destructive (e.g., thin sections of hard samples) observational or measuring tools (e.g., microscopes, spectroscopes, balances).

___________________

1 See Table 4.2 for a listing of various types of instrumentation and Appendix F for definitions of abbreviations used for these instruments.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Image
FIGURE 4.1 Returned sample processing flowchart NOTE: CAPTEM, Curation and Analysis Planning Team for Extraterrestrial Materials.
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
  1. General nondestructive analyses: As sample investigation transitions from initial description and categorization to scientific inquiry, the first detailed observations are generally made with a set of nondestructive (or minimally destructive) methods that are sufficiently general that they are likely to be useful for virtually any material or motivating science question. Examples include optical microscopies and spectroscopies, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Laboratories for such measurements are commonly available at the same institutions that fill a curatorial role, but analyses also may be made in other laboratories, as an initial step to more specialized measurements.
  2. Subsampling and preparation for specialized analysis: While initial triaging of returned samples calls for some level of sample subdivision to facilitate organization and simple descriptions, preparation for specialized, hypothesis-driven measurements often requires more significant modification, and destruction of samples is often required. This might include sorting by physical properties, crushing, grinding, cutting or polishing, exposure to solvents or other reagents, or manipulation by specialized devices such as microtomes or focused ion beam (FIB) mills. This is another activity that is frequently performed at curatorial facilities, but also often performed in analytical laboratories as part of their sample preparation procedures. These procedures have a high potential for sample contamination or destruction and therefore can be carried out only by highly experienced and skilled staff who strictly follow established protocols.
  3. Specialized nondestructive or minimally destructive analyses: Detailed studies aimed at addressing mission science questions may call on techniques that are highly specialized but generally nondestructive or minimally destructive to the sample, once the sample is prepared. These techniques include spectroscopic techniques to assess compositional, structural, and physical properties of materials using a variety of probes, such as light sources (from infrared to X-ray), and electron, neutron, and ion beams. Most facilities for these specialized studies exist outside curatorial institutions.
  4. Specialized destructive analyses: Some fraction of returned samples may be sacrificed for destructive analysis, including most methods of mass spectrometric study for molecular identification or isotope ratio determination. Most facilities for these specialized studies exist outside curatorial institutions. These types of analyses are performed to answer questions related to the age and the origin of extraterrestrial sample materials. Cutting-edge technologies that are currently in use and that will remain necessary in the future include those that are capable of measuring the isotopic composition of various elements (e.g., mass spectrometers). Diverse radiogenic isotope systems can be used for geochronology and source tracing purposes for both terrestrial and extraterrestrial materials (e.g., long-lived Re-Os, Rb-Sr, Sm-Nd, Lu-Hf, Ar-Ar, K-Ar, U-Th-Pb). Because of their short half-life, short-lived radiogenic isotope systems are powerful tools to study early solar system processes and chronology (e.g., Al-Mg, Fe-Ni, Mn-Cr, Pd-Ag, Hf-W, I-Xe, Pu-Xe, Sm-Nd), and some of these systems are exclusively used in extraterrestrial studies. Recently, an increasing number of capabilities are also being developed for the study of nontraditional stable isotope systems (e.g., Si, Zn, Cr, Mg, K, Mo, Nd) in order to detect nucleosynthetic anomalies. This diversity of isotope systems and accompanying analytical capabilities are required to study the range of extraterrestrial materials (metal, silicate, liquid, gas). The challenge for the future is to develop capabilities to adapt to all sample sizes (rocks to dust particles) and materials (e.g., ices, gases).
  5. Archiving: Data products generated during all stages of sample study and any leftover sample material that was not consumed during subsampling and destructive analysis are archived. In general, long-term archiving of sample materials occurs at a curatorial facility, whereas archiving of observational data is tasked to the laboratories in which those observations were made.

4.2 FACILITIES FOR CURATION, TRIAGING, AND DESCRIPTION OF RETURNED SAMPLES

Curation of returned extraterrestrial samples occurs at several facilities around the world, as described in Chapter 2. Russian Luna samples are mainly curated at the Vernadsky Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry, Moscow. The main portion of the Hayabusa sample return is maintained at the Extraterrestrial Sample Curation Center (ESCuC) at the Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, Sagamihara City, Japan. A small fraction (10-15 percent) of returned samples within the United States are stored at the White Sands Test Facility in New Mexico. The vast

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

majority of NASA mission returned samples (Apollo, Genesis, and Stardust), as well as aliquots of Hayabusa and Luna samples, are curated by NASA at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) facility, which is described below.

With nearly 50 years of experience since the return of the Apollo samples, JSC has been a world leader in curatorial management and has developed a range of techniques, materials, and expertise to handle returned samples. The samples curated at JSC are diverse, including lunar samples returned by six crewed Apollo missions, solar wind collectors from the Genesis mission, samples from the coma of comet Wild 2 collected in aerogel by the Stardust mission, a subset of samples collected from the surface of asteroid Itokawa by the Hayabusa mission, cosmic dust collected in the stratosphere, and meteorites collected in Antarctica (which are co-curated with the Smithsonian Institution). Each of these sample types are curated in different facilities that have unique requirements for sample handling and contamination control.

The largest and oldest curatorial facility at JSC is the approximately 300-square-meter Apollo sample suite, which is subdivided into four laboratories. One laboratory securely stores pristine Apollo samples that have not previously been allocated. These are housed in 22 stainless steel nitrogen-purged storage cabinets under International Standards Organization (ISO) Class 6 clean room conditions (Figure 4.2).2 A second ISO Class 6 clean laboratory, the largest of the suite at 186 square meters, is used to process previously unallocated samples and includes a specialized band saw and core processing cabinets. A Return Sample Vault (RSV) securely stores previously allocated and returned Apollo samples in either aluminum or stainless steel under ISO Class 7 conditions. Portions of other collections (Cosmic Dust, Genesis, OSIRIS-REx [Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security, Regolith Explorer] contamination knowledge, Mars 2020 contamination knowledge) are stored in the RSV on a semi-permanent basis. If processing is required on samples from these collections, they are returned to their main laboratory for work. Several ISO Class 7 clean rooms are used for secure processing of previously allocated and returned Apollo samples. These are processed either in nitrogen-purged stainless-steel cabinets or within two laminar flow hoods.

Image
FIGURE 4.2 A lunar sample processor prepares to begin work on pristine lunar samples by placing her hands in the gloves attached to a nitrogen-filled glove box. SOURCE: NASA, “Lunar Sample Laboratory Tour,” https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/laboratory_tour.cfm, last updated September 1, 2016.

___________________

2 ISO Class 6 indicates less than 1,000 particles greater than or equal to 5 microns in size per square foot of air.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

The Genesis sample suite consists of three ISO Class 4 clean laboratories (~93 m2 in overall area) that were used to assemble the Genesis Sample return capsule, load the collector arrays, and clean and store the array and concentrator collectors after their return. First is a laboratory where the Genesis collectors are stored in six permanent nitrogen-purged desiccators. This is where the samples are characterized using a spectroscopic ellipsometer, a compound scanning microscope, and a micro-Fourier-transform infrared spectroscope (FTIR) situated on vibration isolation tables. Three digital cameras are used for imaging on each microscope. A second laboratory houses an ultra-pure water cleaning wet bench that is used to clean Genesis samples prior to allocation and study. Sample containers and processing tools are also cleaned here. A liquid particle counter and a total organic carbon unit are used to verify water quality prior to cleaning procedures. The third and final laboratory of the Genesis suite is an anteroom where a clean flow bench, a compound microscope, and a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) cabinet are used for return sample processing and storage. An ultraviolet ozone cleaner is also used here for thin-film removal from collector surfaces.

A 65-square-meter ISO Class 5 clean room is used to store and process the Stardust cometary and Stardust interstellar trays (Figure 4.3). It consists of an anteroom with a clean flow bench and two micropipette pullers, which are used to create pulled quartz needles that are used to subdivide the aerogel cells for allocation. The sample storage and processing room is used to store the aerogel samples in four custom nitrogen-purged desiccators. The samples are imaged and processed using specialized microscope systems situated on three vibration isolation tables. Three scanning compound microscopes are used to subdivide and document cometary and interstellar track morphology using MATLAB scripts. Four digital cameras are attached to the microscopes for high-resolution image capture.

The aliquot of Hayabusa sample returned from the Itokawa asteroid by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) and provided to NASA is housed in a small, approximately 18-square-meter ISO Class 5 clean laboratory that contains a nitrogen-purged glove box for storage and handling of the samples. A compound scanning microscope with a digital camera is situated on a vibration isolation table with micromanipulators for sample handling.

Other suites within the curatorial facility house Antarctic meteorites, cosmic dust, and the microparticle impact collection (satellites that have recorded microparticle impacts in space). Additional information about curation of lunar, Genesis, and Stardust returned samples is provided in the relevant sections of Chapter 2.

Image
FIGURE 4.3 Scientists examine the Stardust aerogel collector upon its arrival in the curatorial facility at NASA Johnson Space Center. SOURCE: NASA Johnson Space Center, “Stardust: Dust from Comets and Interstellar Space,” https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/stardust/index.cfm, last updated April 17, 2018.
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

While the present suite of samples curated at JSC is diverse, the samples share the common feature of being primarily rocky samples composed of materials that are largely stable at ambient pressure and temperature conditions (i.e., hard condensed matter, as defined in Box 1.1). As such, capabilities developed during Apollo (e.g., dry nitrogen storage, Class 6-7 clean rooms, etc.) have largely preserved the pristine condition of these samples. More recent sample return missions, such as the cometary dust from Wild 2 captured in aerogel by the Stardust mission, have required corresponding development of new techniques. This development has been facilitated by close partnership between JSC Astromaterials Curation and the mission team. As currently formulated, curation of samples returned by Discovery and New Frontiers class missions will be conducted at JSC, with major development and initial operations costs paid by the respective mission, while long-term curation is supported by NASA through funding of JSC Astromaterials Curation. Planning for potential future sample return missions, such as from Mars, is discussed in Chapter 5 (see Section 5.3).

4.3 SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION

Once returned samples are documented and characterized by the mission team and safely housed in the curatorial facility, aliquots may be sent to laboratories around the world for cutting-edge analyses. As all returned samples are considered national and future heritage resources, strict protocols are in place for requesting, transporting, and securing these samples. All requests for samples curated at JSC are vetted first by the relevant curator, and then by the Curation and Analysis Planning Team for Extra Terrestrial Materials (CAPTEM).3

Apollo sample requests are made to the Apollo Sample Curator at JSC, who reviews them for content, and those deemed to be suitably mature are sent to CAPTEM for further evaluation.4 Investigators must provide evidence that their science, including analytical protocols, have passed peer review. This generally requires funding of a science proposal (from NASA, or other foreign or domestic government or nonprofit funding agency) within the past 3 years to work on the requested samples or submittal of a science proposal to work on the samples, backed up by evidence of peer-reviewed publications that report results using the same methods to be used on the requested samples and thorough documentation of the analytical methodology. CAPTEM then reviews the appropriateness of the sample request and makes a recommendation to the Apollo Sample Curator. Investigators must furthermore adhere to strict protocols for transporting, storing, and documenting sample handling and weight.

Similarly, Genesis mission sample requests are made to the Genesis Solar Wind Sample Curator at JSC, who reviews them for content, and those deemed to be suitably mature are sent to the Genesis Allocation Subcommittee of CAPTEM for further evaluation.5 The proposals must define the science objectives and document the sensitivity, precision, and accuracy of the analytical methods to be employed in the investigation. The proposals must also document that the method exceeds set precision and accuracy goals, or justify why the science can be accomplished without meeting these goals, as well as providing a plan for surface cleaning of the samples appropriate for the particular analyses being proposed. Also, because the Genesis samples are small and easily contaminated, the investigator is encouraged to design a shipping container that will safeguard the integrity of the sample or use a shipping container supplied by the curatorial staff.

Stardust mission sample requests are sent to the Stardust Sample Curator, who evaluates them and then forwards viable proposals to the Stardust Sample Allocation Subcommittee (SSAS) of CAPTEM. This committee evaluates “the scientific content of the proposal, capability of the proposers, availability of requested samples, and the realism of the investigation. SSAS will also weigh the overall merit of the proposal with the required amount of sample and any possible collateral damage to the remainder of the collection.”6 Because of the extremely limited

___________________

3 NASA, “CAPTEM Homepage,” https://www.lpi.usra.edu/captem/, last updated September 26, 2018.

4 NASA Johnson Space Center, 2012, “Lunar Sample Allocation Guidebook,” JSC-06090 Revision F, Houston, Tex., https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/sampreq/lunarallochndbk-jsc06090_revf_2012.pdf.

5 NASA Johnson Space Center, 2012, Genesis Research Sample Investigator’s Guidebook, JSC 63358 Revision A, https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/genesis/forms/genesisguidebook-jsc63358reva.pdf.

6 NASA Johnson Space Center, 2006, Stardust Sample Investigator’s Guidebook, https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/stardust/forms/stardustinvestigatorsguidebook.pdf.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

sample size, investigators are encouraged to work in consortia to maximize the science yield from each particle—in particular, coordinating analyses that entail sample destruction.

The committee has not evaluated CAPTEM’s processes in detail, but notes that CAPTEM has been an effective means by which to allocate existing Apollo, Stardust, Genesis, and meteorite samples.

Finding: Allocation of returned samples to laboratories around the world requires careful vetting of requests for samples and special handling during shipment and storage at an analytical facility.

4.4 ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT

4.4.1 Classifications and Overview of Analytical Instrumentation

The scientific goals of sample return missions are broadly defined. For example, one of the OSIRIS-REx mission’s goals is to “return and analyze a pristine carbon rich asteroid sample.”7 These analyses are accomplished using a large range of instruments distributed across dozens of institutions. Additionally, the types of materials being analyzed are changing, from the lunar samples composed primarily of silicates, oxides, glasses, and metals, to the more recent and upcoming samples that contain significant amounts of organic materials. Accordingly, the committee has focused on techniques that have been used to analyze both rocky and organic materials, as well as some methods likely to become more relevant in the near future. To facilitate discussion of this complex topic, the discussion is organized by defining how each technology relates to the following four traits or qualities:

  1. Types and purposes of methods: Extraterrestrial sample analysis involves diverse technologies and modes of material description and quantification. Tables 4.1 and 4.2 provide a guide to these methods, which are subdivided into several broad categories (microscopy, tomography, etc.), each of which is further divided into subcategories described by brief narrative explanations of their core technologies or procedures and their purposes.
  2. Availability and access: A very large number of laboratories have contributed to sample return science or could be used as analytical resources for ongoing or near-future sample return missions. The committee has not attempted to create an exhaustive list of all such facilities (and the committee believes this could not be done without omissions). Instead, each technology is categorized according to a five-tier scheme describing its availability and access. These categories range from commonly available and accessible (category 1), to unique technologies that are available at only one institution and accessible only through a gatekeeping procedure controlled by that institution (category 5). Thus, availability and access generally become more restricted as the numbering level in this scheme increases. (See Table 4.1 for details.)

    The instruments and methods described as common (category 1) are in widespread use in tier-1 research universities and other relevant research institutions, and typically have few restrictions on their access and use. They can be assumed to be available for current sample return science (and likely will remain so in the future, provided the instruments are replaced once they reach their operational lifetime). Multiple regional facilities (categories 2 and 3) include instruments that provide “flagship” analytical or experimental capabilities for leading research laboratories; they exist in multiple U.S. and international institutions and are widely recognized in the sample return science community, yet their expense and sophistication is such that only relatively well funded laboratories with highly trained staff can obtain and operate them. For this reason, they may exist as regional centers, used by both members of their home institutions and visitors from other institutions. The categories of unique instruments (categories 4 and 5) include experimental or prototype instruments, generally designed to meet specific analytical or experimental goals that cannot be reached by other technologies, and that exist in only one location and generally require highly specialized skills to use.

___________________

7 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, 2017, “NASA’s OSIRIS-REx Asteroid Sample Return Mission,” FS-206-4-411-GSFC, http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/osiris_rex_factsheet5-9.pdf.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
  1. Both regional facilities and unique instrumentation can present difficulties with respect to access, depending on the policies of the stakeholders who control them; for this reason, they are subdivided into user facilities and nonuser facilities. User facilities (categories 3 and 5), are open to external access, usually subject to a peer-reviewed proposal review process. Limited access facilities (categories 2 and 4) are generally used only by their directing scientific staff, and occasionally through collaboration with outside users. The distinction here is that user facilities have routine procedures in place to permit access to any outside user, whereas limited access facilities treat outside use on a case-by-case basis.

  2. Relevance to sample return missions and materials: Investments in analytical infrastructure for sample return missions are guided by the science goals of missions, as defined by a traceability matrix or equivalent statement of concrete goals. However, the long timescales of mission return science and the complexity and unpredictability of returned materials make it difficult to foresee which technologies might be useful for a given set of mission objectives, or what questions future generations might ask about returned samples. Moreover, much of the analytical infrastructure available to the community of scientists concerned with analysis of returned samples is either heritage technology developed for some previous mission having different goals or was created to meet some different need in the natural or applied sciences. For these reasons, many forms of instrumentation used by the institutions engaged in sample return science have potential value. Nevertheless, limitations to the resources available through the Planetary Science grant programs—Laboratory Analysis of Returned Samples (LARS) and Planetary Major Equipment and Facilities (PMEF)—mean one must discriminate between investments that advance the goals of sample return science and those that have no recognized use for that purpose. For this reason, Table 4.2 also includes a brief description of the ways in which each listed analytical technology has a recognized relevance to the scientific goals of sample return missions.

    One challenge faced in making instrument investment decisions in the coming years is the changing nature of science goals driving sample return missions. Prior to the Genesis mission, extraterrestrial sample analysis science focused exclusively on lunar samples returned as part of the Apollo or Luna programs, cosmic dust, or meteoritic materials. A large fraction of this work focused on characterizing the mineralogy and elemental and isotopic compositions of silicates, oxides, glasses, and metals, typically on scales of micrometers or larger. More recent sample return missions, including Stardust, Hayabusa, OSIRIS-REx and Hayabusa2, call for study of the structures and molecular chemistries of organic materials, structurally amorphous organic solids with highly complex molecular structures, and small (submicrometer) objects or domains. This means that technologies that used to be considered highly mission relevant may now have lesser relevance to ongoing or near-future missions. The committee’s evaluation of this issue considers continued science on materials returned by the Apollo program, but more strongly emphasizes science goals of the Genesis, Stardust, and Hayabusa missions, the ongoing OSIRIS-REx and Hayabusa2 missions, and planned near-future sample return missions (including possible Mars sample return and cometary sample return).

  3. Stakeholders and hosting institutions: Sections 4.2 through 4.4—the main body of this chapter—consist of detailed descriptions of the curatorial and analytical facilities relevant to study of returned extraterrestrial materials in the United States and international partners in sample return missions. This material is organized according to the stakeholders in each institution. A stakeholder in a facility or instrument is the party principally responsible for investing the capital costs and paying for related infrastructure, staffing and continuing costs of operation. Many instruments are initially purchased with multiple stakeholders (e.g., through cost sharing arrangements), so the definition used here considers the full costs of operating an instrument over its useful lifetime.

    Stakeholders generally have a high level of access and control over an instrument’s uses, condition, staffing, and associated sample holding and preparation facilities. Non-stakeholders may make use of an instrument, and they benefit from lack of responsibility for continuing costs, but in exchange they often must adapt their samples and analytical goals to conform to the laboratory’s practices. In the case of the precious and sensitive (possibly hazardous) materials considered by sample return missions, an entity that controls the samples, but is not an analytical facility, may be forced to make difficult judgments as to whether a given

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

instrument out of its control is maintained and operated in a way that meets scientific and safety standards (which may differ from mission to mission, and over time—see Section 4.3 for a description about how sample allocation is determined for present return samples). These issues are particularly important when considering facilities and instruments that are not common or user facilities, yet have high mission relevance (by the definitions used in Table 4.1). In such cases, it is particularly important that a stakeholder in that capability has direct connections with the science teams and funding agencies of sample return missions. Thus, investment decisions will need to balance availability and mission relevance of technologies with some understanding of which institutions need to be stakeholders in those technologies in order for them to be used appropriately for sample return mission science.

TABLE 4.1 Classification of Facilities by Availability and Access (1-5) and by Broad Types of Analysis (A-C)

Types of Analysis
Types of Facilities A. Sample and Specimen Preparation B. Physical or Structural Analysis C. Chemical or Compositional Analysis
1. Commonly available at most institutions—broadly accessible 1A
For example, cutting, grinding, thin section preparation
1B
For example, optical microscopy—zoom and petrographic microscopes
1C
For example, general analytical chemistry equipment
2. Multiple regional facilities—limited accessa 2A
For example, scanning electron microscope equipped with focused ion beam technology
2B
For example, X-ray tomography laboratories (M3EGA Laboratory, JSC)
2C
For example, many mass spectrometry laboratories
Tabletop FTIR and Raman spectroscopy systems
3. Multiple regional facilities—with access open to usersb 3A
For example, neutron activation sources
3B
For example, National Center for Electron Microscopy
3C
For example, national ion microprobe centers
4. Unique facility—limited accessa 4A
For example, Creek Road Cryogenic Complex, NASA Glenn Research Center
4B
For example, shockwave laboratories, specialized laboratories at national laboratories and related research centers
4C
For example, MegaSIMS (UCLA), CHILI (University of Chicago)
5. Unique facility—access open to usersc 5A
For example, Molecular Foundry, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
5B
For example, synchrotron-or neutron-based diffraction or tomography techniques
5C
For example, synchrotron-or neutron-based spectroscopy techniques
Mission Relevance (MR) Classifications MR I
Fundamental tools relevant for all sample return missions
MR II
More specialized tools, required for rock and metal samples
MR III
More specialized tools, required for organic, volatile, and other low-temperature materials
MR IV
Direct mission relevance not established; however, technique may generate unique data relevant to specific missions
(Additional mission-specific information provided in comments in Table 4.2, where applicable)

NOTE: Examples of specific facilities are provided when they are notable or unique. Mission relevance classifications are provided below the main table. These classifications are used in Table 4.2. Acronyms are defined in Appendix F.

a Facilities with limited use external to the institution.

b Open access, often by recharge for regional facilities.

c Open access, often by peer-reviewed proposal for unique user facilities.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

Specifically, the committee classifies a given facility or instrument as having NASA, or any other U.S. institution (such as a university or non-NASA national laboratory), or any international institution as the primary stakeholder. Some judgment was required in some such instances—for example, the committee regards the MegaSIMS instrument as having NASA as the stakeholder, because it was funded and operated largely using mission-specific NASA funding, but it is housed at a U.S. university (University of California, Los Angeles [UCLA]) and is therefore listed under U.S. laboratories external to NASA. Finally, there are two types of analytical technologies that raise special issues with regard to investment strategies for sample return missions and associated science: (1) Cutting-edge technologies are instruments and methods that break new ground in fundamental abilities to observe physical and chemical properties of natural materials; recent examples include MegaSIMS (developed for the Genesis mission) and the Chicago Instrument for Laser Ionization (CHILI; built to study samples from Stardust and similarly small, complex, extraterrestrial materials). Such projects present unique risks (as their outcomes cannot be confidently foreseen), but also unique opportunities, where investment can lead to dramatic advances, creating new ways of observing, describing, and analyzing materials and environments. Highly innovative or inventive technologies may have increased “return on investment” because of the new opportunities for scientific advancement that they create, and therefore are an important part of any balanced portfolio of investments in instrumentation. (2) Nontraditional technologies are instruments and methods that may be common in scientific disciplines that have not had significant overlap with the community of researchers performing sample return science, but they have potential to impact the study of samples returned by ongoing or near-future missions. Examples include the atom probe, various forms of advanced molecular mass spectrometry (Fourier-transform mass spectrometry, tandem mass spectrometry), and high-sensitivity molecular surface analysis (soft sputtering ion sources).

A few examples of how to interpret Table 4.2, referencing Table 4.1: Scanning electron microscopy is classified as 1B, 1C in availability and access—that is, used for physical analysis and commonly available and accessible. SEM is classified as Mission Relevance (MR) I and MR II in mission relevance—that is, relevant to the fundamental analysis of all returned samples, as well as some SEM techniques having more specialized applications. On the other hand, synchrotron-based X-ray Raman spectroscopy is classified as 5B and 5C in availability and access—that is, used for structural and chemical analysis and available at unique facilities with user access. It is classified as MR IV in mission relevance—that is, not commonly used for analysis of returned samples but could provide unique data and become more relevant to future missions. Helium ion microscopy (4C, MR II) is used for high-spatial-resolution imaging and compositional analysis and is available at unique facilities with only limited access. It is a specialized tool currently relevant for rock and metal samples, but it is rapidly developing for organic and hybrid structures (i.e., materials that are a mixture of hard and soft condensed matter).

The following sections discuss laboratory instrumentation available at the institutions involved in sample return science, organized according to the dominant stakeholder.

4.4.2 NASA Center Analytical Laboratories and Facilities

4.4.2.1 Johnson Space Center

JSC has over 200 active research and operational scientists, analysts, and technicians who support the missions of NASA, and of these, approximately 75 are involved in analyses of extraterrestrial materials. JSC is involved in developing planetary science mission concepts and providing Earth imagery to the Earth science community. There is a wide range of equipment in the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science section that is used for the analysis and classification of terrestrial, planetary, and solar materials and space-exposed hardware. See Appendix B for a listing of the analytical equipment available at JSC.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

TABLE 4.2 Examples of Specific Instruments, Methods, Facilities or Facility Types Used in Extraterrestrial Sample Analyses

Method Purpose Availability and Access and Mission Relevance (MR) (See Table 4.1) Comments on Relevance to Extraterrestrial Materials and Sample Return Missions
Sampling and Specimen Preparation Methods
Sample preparation Mechanical perturbations to the sample: crushing, grinding, cutting, polishing Observations of surfaces, internal structure/substructure; typically for subsequent scattering, imaging, spectroscopy, and other related measurements 1A
MR I
Available in most laboratories involved with extraterrestrial material analysis; more relevant for hard materials
Electro Chemical polishing, electrothinning, electrochemical polishing Improved surface finish, preparation of thin sections for microscopy/analysis 1A
MR I
Available in most laboratories involved with extraterrestrial material analysis; more relevant for hard materials
Micro-/nano-manipulation, sample positioning, monitoring Positioning of samples for subsequent subsampling and/or analysis 1A
MR I
Relevant for both hard and soft materials
Robotic sampling, sample-handling, manipulation/positioning Minimal human intervention in sampling/subsampling, selection, positioning for subsequent sampling and analysis 2A, 3A
MR II
Relevant for both hard and soft materials; robotic and remote sample handling will be especially important for sensitive samples and planetary protection
Laser cutting, lithography, curing, and related photo-induced methods Sampling, positioning, sectioning and related micromechanical manipulation 2A, 3A
MR II
Ultramicrotomy/wire-saw/sectioning; typically hard particulates in soft matrices Preparation of ultra-thin sections; typically for subsequent microscopy/analysis 2A, 3A
MR I
Relevant for both hard and soft materials
Focused ion beam (FIB) Site- and shape-specific sectioning, liftoff, milling for scanning transmission and transmission electron microscopy (S-TEM) and other analytical methods; FIB with cryo-stage rapidly evolving as a key method for sectioning and preparation of soft (bio/polymer), hybrid (soft-hard interfaces and complexes), and even hard structures that otherwise are fragile and prone to damage 2A, 3A
MR II
More relevant for hard materials; soft materials require cryogenic microscope capabilities
Critical point drying (CPD), chemical fixation, related soft/biological sample preparation (ambient temperature preparation methods) Dehydrate, or chemical fixing of soft/biological structures while retaining structural architecture of soft/biological matter; typically for subsequent analysis (SEM/TEM, etc.) 1A
MR III
More relevant for soft materials
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Method Purpose Availability and Access and Mission Relevance (MR) (See Table 4.1) Comments on Relevance to Extraterrestrial Materials and Sample Return Missions
Resin embedding, ultramicrotomy, sectioning Thin/thick sections of soft matter, soft-hard interfaces, soft/hard inclusions; typically for subsequent analysis 1A, 2A, 3A
MR I
Relevant for hard materials; soft materials require specialized cryogenic techniques
Plunge-freezing and related cryopreservation techniques (low temperature/cryo-methods) Thin vitrified ice sections containing soft matter, soft/hard inclusions in soft matrices; typically for further analysis with electron microscopy 2A, 3A
MR III
Relevant for soft materials
Freeze fracture, high-pressure freezing (HPF), ion etching, replica methods Preparation of hard-soft surfaces, composites; typically for subsequent EM/S-TEM and other analysis 1A
MR IV
Relevant for hard or soft materials; particularly useful for fine-grained mixed materials
Ultramicrotomy/cryoultramicrotomy Thin sections of soft/hybrid structures, monolithic slices or particulate composites; for subsequent analysis 2A, 3A
MR IV
Relevant for hard or soft materials, particularly fine-grained mixed materials
Microscopy, Tomography, and Diffraction Techniques
Light Microscopy
Optical microscopy techniques: binocular, optical, reflected, polarized petrographic scopes Noninvasive imaging, spectroscopy, depth and through-thickness analysis 1B
MR I
Specialized and unconventional light-optical techniques—for example, second harmonic generation (SHG), waveguide- and near-field techniques Noninvasive, optical and structural measurements; typically via light-optical response of the materials 2B, 3B
MR IV
Computed and computer-aided tomography (CT/CAT) Radiation-based 3D (4D reconstruction) of objects/structures, down to submicrometer resolution 4B, 5B MR I Laboratory-based X-ray tomography and synchrotron-based X-ray tomography
Electron Microscopy
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM), including field emission SEM Imaging the surface of materials at the nano- to micrometer scale; capable of wavelength and energy dispersive spectrometry, cathodoluminescence, and SEM-based Raman; low vacuum and environmental chamber SEMs can be used for unprepared surface observation of nonconductive materials 1B
MR I, MR III
Capable of characterizing both hard and soft materials
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Method Purpose Availability and Access and Mission Relevance (MR) (See Table 4.1) Comments on Relevance to Extraterrestrial Materials and Sample Return Missions
Electron probe microanalysis (EPMA), including field emission EPMA (FE-EPMA) In situ major and trace element analyses; quantitative microchemical measurements, typically by wavelength-dispersive spectrometry (WDS), but electron-dispersive spectrometry (EDS) also possible, as is concomitant CL spectral acquisition; combined WDS-EDS mapping for trace and major element composition at the microscale 1C, 2C MR I
SEM-electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) Characterization of crystalline structure of materials, crystal orientation, orientation mapping 1B
MR I, MR II
Microtextural analysis of hard, crystalline materials
Transmission and scanning transmission electron microscopy (S-TEM) Atomic- and nanoscale imaging, diffraction, spectroscopy and spectroscopic imaging of hard, soft, or hybrid materials 1B, 2B
MR I, MR II
Cryo/cold stages for SEMs Imaging soft or volatile materials, frozen materials, EBSD measurements on ice, and so on 2B, 2C
MR III
Often associated with low-vacuum and environmental chamber SEM
Cryomicroscopy S-TEMs Cryo-stages enable improved integrity and stability of structures against radiolysis (beam damage), reduce diffusion at low temperatures, and so on; all of which facilitate extended S-TEM observations, for typically atomic and nanoscale imaging and analysis of soft and hybrid (and even hard) structures 2B, 2C
MR III
Diffraction Techniques
Laboratory-based X-ray diffraction X-ray diffraction patterns for mineral identification and characterization 1B, 1C
MR I
Essential tool for mineral identification
Synchrotron-based X-ray diffraction Synchrotron X-ray sources have widely tunable X-ray energies, with high spatial and energy resolution, and development of specialized techniques 5B, 5C
MR II
Requires proposal-based access to use facilities; more routinely available laboratory-based diffractometers can be used also
Other Microscopy Methods
Atomic force microscopy (AFM), scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) Surface structure, surface topography of nonconductive (AFM) and conductive (STM) samples 2B, 3B
MR IV
Surface-sensitive technique
Ultrasound imaging/spectroscopy Noninvasive, subsurface imaging, analysis (mm-scale resolution but large depth access) 1B
MR I
Nondestructive characterization of internal structures of hard or soft materials
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Method Purpose Availability and Access and Mission Relevance (MR) (See Table 4.1) Comments on Relevance to Extraterrestrial Materials and Sample Return Missions
Piezo-resistive force microscopy (PFM), magnetic-force microscopy (MFM), and related local measurements Surface and subsurface imaging, analysis of polarization, magnetization and related near-field measurements 2B, 3B
MR IV
Characterization of surfaces of hard or soft materials
Spectroscopy Techniques
Light Spectroscopy Techniques
Laser-based Raman spectroscopy Nondestructive method for phase identification and estimates of pressure (for inclusions within minerals) 2B, 2C
MR I
First-line characterization for curating most ET materials
Synchrotron-based X-ray Raman spectroscopy Nondestructive method for phase identification and estimates of pressure (for inclusions within minerals) 5B, 5C
MR IV
Specialized phase identification in fine-grained mixed solids
Laboratory-based infrared, UV-Vis, multiphoton/related spectroscopy Vibration, absorption, and electronic structure determination of structures, suspensions, gases, and hybrids 2B, 2C 3B, 3C
MR I
Identification of water and volatiles within small samples
Synchrotron-based infrared, UV-Vis, multiphoton/related microscopy, spectroscopy Characterization of absorption features of materials for comparison with remote sensing IR spectra, identification of organic C-H and C-O features; high spatial and energy resolution 5B, 5C
MR II, MR III
Identification of water and volatiles within small samples
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and related magnetic techniques Noninvasive, subsurface imaging, spectroscopy, and tomography (e.g., MRI imaging) 2B, 3B
MR II
Provides a quantitative analysis of functional groups in organic solids; sensitive detection of hydrogen in inorganic solids
Mössbauer spectroscopy Nondestructive bulk characterization method for local electronic environment of selected isotopes, including 57Fe; determination of valence, spin state, coordination number, ligand orientation, and magnetic information; can be performed in bench top laboratory mode using gamma rays as well as synchrotron-based using inelastic X-ray scattering 4C, 5C
MR II
Identification of iron oxidation state and speciation in mineral structures
X-Ray and Neutron-Based Spectroscopies
Laboratory-based X-ray fluorescence Analyses of whole rock major and trace element compositions 2C, 3C
MR I
Synchrotron-based X-ray fluorescence techniques X-ray diffraction at small scales (µm to nm), determination of oxidation states of minerals, map functional groups in organic phases 5C
MR II
Requires proposal-based access to use facilities
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Method Purpose Availability and Access and Mission Relevance (MR) (See Table 4.1) Comments on Relevance to Extraterrestrial Materials and Sample Return Missions
Synchrotron-based scanning transmission X-ray (micro) spectroscopy (STXM) Nondestructive method of submicron imaging of organic and inorganic compounds and molecular structure using X-ray absorption near-edge structure (XANES) spectroscopy of ultra-thin section of solids 3B, 3C 4B, 4C
MR II, MR III
Provides functional group-level characterization of organic solids as well as element mapping at special scales down to 30 nm
Neutron scattering Noninvasive, deep penetrating imaging, spectroscopy/scattering magnetic measurements 5B, 5C
MR III
Requires proposal-based access to use facilities; sensitive to proton position within structures; helps characterize presence of water and other volatiles
Miscellaneous techniques: gamma ray imaging, terahertz spectroscopy Specialized capabilities, analysis of radioactivity MR IV
Mass Spectrometry for Chemical and Isotopic Analysis
In Situ Techniques
Time-of-Flight SIMS (ToF-SIMS) Elemental, isotopic and molecular in situ analysis at the micron scale, elemental and isotopic mapping 2C, 3C
MR I
Analysis of small samples, such as interplanetary and presolar dust grains, and inclusions in meteorites; molecular and atomic ion species are measured simultaneously; little sample destruction
SIMS (large radius—CAMECA 1270, 1280, SHRIMP) In situ trace element and isotopic analyses at >5 μm; may be fitted with a cryo-stage for analyses of ices 2C, 3C
MR I
Measurements of volatile compounds and trace elements with a high special resolution
NanoSIMS In situ trace element and isotopic analyses with <100 nm spatial resolution and high sensitivity 4C, 5C
MR II
Identification of small grains (submicron), characterization of µm elemental and isotopic compositions in small grains; studies of presolar grains and organic matter, Stardust and Genesis samples, lunar samples and meteorite geochronology
MegaSIMS Genesis oxygen isotope analyses 4C
MR II, MR III
Specialized measurements of low-abundance components of surfaces and nanograins
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Method Purpose Availability and Access and Mission Relevance (MR) (See Table 4.1) Comments on Relevance to Extraterrestrial Materials and Sample Return Missions
Chicago Instrument for Laser Ionization (CHILI) Isotopic analyses at nanometer scale 4C
MR II, MR III
Analysis of small particles with exceptional sensitivity, such as Stardust samples
Resonance ion mass spectrometry (RIMS) High-sensitivity atomic and isotopic analysis 4C
MR II
Specialized high-sensitivity analysis
He ion microscopy Imaging of surfaces, electronic structure contrast, topography analysis, orientation imaging 4C
MR II, MR III
Laser ablation ICP-MS, and laser ablation MC-ICP-MS (including split-stream) In situ trace element and isotopic analyses at >10 μm scale 2C
MR II
Spatially resolved trace-element and isotopic analysis of hard solids; geochronology and source tracing of extraterrestrial materials
Atom probe tomography (APT) 3D subnanometer mapping, atomic number identification and mass measurement of individual atoms (combined field-ion microscope with ToF MS) 3C
MR II, MR III
Atomic and isotopic mapping of exceptionally small domains; suitable for hard materials, or soft materials when equipped with cryogenic sample handling
Bulk Chemical and Isotopic Analysis
Accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) Form of mass spectrometry that accelerates ions to ultrahigh kinetic energies before mass analysis; the special attribute of AMS is its ability to separate rare isotope from abundant neighboring mass of another element 2C
MR II
Specialized high-sensitivity analysis of rare nuclides; used for cosmic ray exposure dating
Thermal ionization mass spectrometry (TIMS) Measurements of trace element concentrations through isotope dilution, high-precision isotope ratio measurements of isotopes through thermal ionization mass spectrometry; geochronology and source tracing purposes 2C
MR II
Relevant for high-precision analyses of a variety of isotope systems (both stable and radiogenic); chronology of extraterrestrial materials
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Method Purpose Availability and Access and Mission Relevance (MR) (See Table 4.1) Comments on Relevance to Extraterrestrial Materials and Sample Return Missions
Multicollector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (MC-ICP-MS) Measurements of trace element concentrations through isotope dilution, high-precision isotope ratio measurements of isotopes through high-temperature ionization via an argon plasma 2C
MR II
Relevant for high-precision analyses of a variety of isotope systems (both stable and radiogenic); chronology of extraterrestrial materials
Quadrupole or single magnetic sector ICP-MS Trace element concentration measurements, lower precision isotopic ratio measurements. 2C
MR II
Relevant for routine analyses of a variety of isotope systems (both stable and radiogenic)
Gas source mass spectrometry High-precision molecular identification and isotope ratios analysis for organic matter and gases; may use any of several sector, ToF, or Fourier-transform mass spectrometers 1C, 2C, 5C
MR III
Molecular characterization and isotope ratio analysis of organic matter and gases
Gas and liquid chromatography mass spectrometry Chemical separation of complex mixtures of volatile compounds followed by online mass spectrometry; for molecular identification and isotope ratio analysis; may use any of several sector, ToF, or Fourier-transform mass spectrometers 1C, 2C, 5C
MR III
Molecular characterization and isotope ratio analysis of organic matter and gases
Atomic absorption mass spectrometry Destructive analytical chemistry technique to determine the concentration of a species within a gas or liquid solution; can be used to evaluate the concentration of a specific species within a multicomponent solution 1C, 2C
MR III
Instrumental and radiochemical neutron activation analysis (INAA) Trace element analyses of whole rock and mineral powders 4A
MR II
Used to analyze meteorites but destructive of returned material at the nuclear level
Thermoanalytic Methods
Thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA) Destructive thermoanalytic technique in which the mass (or density) of a sample is measured as a function of increasing temperature; can be used to identify phase changes, volatilization, combustion, and other thermal breakdown processes; can be combined with other chemically sensitive techniques such as mass spectrometry to get chemical as well as physical information 1B, 2B, 3B
MR I, MR III
For example, M3EGA Laboratory at JSC (4C) is a TGA and DSC device coupled with additional gas mass spectrometers for chemical analysis
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) Thermoanalytic technique that measures the heat capacity of a material with respect to a reference; this technique is especially sensitive for detecting phase transitions in polymers and other organics 1B, 2B
MR III

NOTE: Acronyms are defined in Appendix F.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

4.4.2.2 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

The Astrobiology Analytical Laboratory at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center occupies 167 square meters of laboratory space. Staffed with nine principal scientists and technical staff, it provides state-of-the-art analytical capabilities for studies of organic molecules in terrestrial analogs and extraterrestrial materials. The analytical instrumentation primarily focuses on chromatographic systems for molecular separation that employ either gas chromatographs or liquid chromatographs. These include multiple instruments. Molecular detection is accomplished via optical detectors (e.g., linear diode array detectors and fluorescence detectors) and mass spectrometry (e.g., quadrupole mass analyzers, dual quad mass analyzers, ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry, time-of-flight mass analyzers, and isotope ratio mass spectrometric analyzers. In addition to this major analytical instrumentation, the Astrobiology Analytical Laboratory is equipped with a wide range of sample preparation facilities, including HEPA-filtered benches, furnaces for off-line pyrolysis, ball mill for sample pulverization, balances, fume hoods, and so on.

4.4.2.3 Jet Propulsion Laboratory

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) maintains three research groups concerned with cosmochemistry and astrobiology, two of which focus primarily on chemical analysis relevant to sample return science (the third is a group focused on geobiology and astrobiology but with no history of study of returned extraterrestrial materials; therefore, it is not included in this review). The Planetary Chemistry and Astrobiology Division at JPL includes a laboratory for the analysis of trace metals and their isotopes in extraterrestrial samples, including ultra-clean laboratories for sample handling, digestion, and chemical separation and analytical instrumentation for characterizing metal abundances (using ICP-MS) and isotope ratios (using TIMS). The primary research focus of this group has been early solar system chronology, based on the study of meteorites and samples returned by the Apollo program. This group is being restructured at present, in response to the impending retirement of its long-time director. The analytical capabilities will be merged with the laboratories for geochemistry and cosmochemistry at Caltech. A second laboratory at JPL uses ToF-SIMS techniques to study trace contamination of surfaces of space flight instruments and platforms, with the aim of characterizing and improving planetary protection threats and contamination hazards to sample return missions.

4.4.3 Keck/NASA Reflectance Experiment Laboratory

The Keck/NASA Reflectance Experiment Laboratory (RELAB) is housed at Brown University but supported by NASA as a multiuser spectroscopy facility. Laboratory time is available at no charge to investigators who are in funded NASA research programs. Users can visit the laboratory or send samples to be analyzed. RELAB maintains the spectral database, a reference for spectral reflectance data returned by planetary missions. The facility has two operational spectrometers available to NASA-funded scientists:

  • A near-ultraviolet, visible, and near-infrared bidirectional spectrometer; and
  • A near- and mid-infrared FTIR spectrometer.

These spectrometers are being used to expand the spectral database, which is a freely accessible online archive.8 The database is becoming the principal reference for remotely sensed spectral reflectance data for planetary science. The RELAB policy is that all data are publicly archived within 3 years of acquisition.

The RELAB has two technical staff positions that aid in the maintenance of the laboratory, the spectrometers, and the spectral database. The technicians also assist users who visit the facility and analyze samples sent for analysis. Technical support is directly funded by NASA, as is instrument upkeep and modernization. User fee

___________________

8 Brown University, 2014, “RELAB Spectral Database,” NASA Reflective Laboratory disclaimer, http://www.planetary.brown.edu/relabdocs/relab_disclaimer.htm.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

models are considered unsustainable and will add volatility to retaining technical staff, as corporate memory and experience is highly valued.

Conclusion: RELAB has been a community resource in producing and compiling spectral databases of rocks, asteroids, and planets. In light of flat or decreased budgets, this type of multiuser facility may be an appropriate future model for other common types of instrumentation used for extraterrestrial analyses.

4.4.4 U.S. Laboratories External to NASA or Other Government-Supported Facilities

The committee requested information from a number of U.S.-based laboratories currently undertaking analyses of extraterrestrial materials (see Appendix B for data compilation) to ascertain the array of analytical capabilities and staffing. These are mainly university-based laboratories, but also include museums (Smithsonian, American Museum of Natural History) and private institutions (Carnegie Institution of Washington). This synopsis does not include large, multiuser facilities such as synchrotrons, or laboratories supported by government agencies other than NASA, which are described separately in following sections. However, the committee recognizes that these demarcations of how facilities are supported are not necessarily clearly defined. Many user facilities benefit from leveraged support among different agencies, including NASA. For example, the upgrade of the X-ray beamline at the Geo Soil Enviro Center for Advanced Radiation Sources (GSECARS) user facility at the Advanced Photon Source (APS) was cost-shared by NASA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Department of Energy (DOE).

A wide variety of analytical equipment is currently in use in non-NASA U.S. laboratories to characterize and study extraterrestrial samples. This instrumentation covers every major category of technology and analytical target that can be addressed by existing technologies, including common, commercially available instruments—i.e., nonprototype versions of microscopes (e.g., SEM, TEM, EPMA), spectroscopies (e.g., FTIR/Raman), commercially available common and more specialized mass spectrometry instrumentation (e.g., (MC)-ICP-MS, TIMS, SIMS, isotope ratio mass spectrometry, and RIMS), as well as specialized sample preparation equipment (e.g., FIB).9 It also includes two unique instruments designed for high-resolution sampling and high-precision in situ isotopic measurements: the CHILI instrument at the University of Chicago, and the MegaSIMS at UCLA. Collectively, these data suggest that, at present, U.S. laboratories are generally well instrumented to carry out extraterrestrial sample analyses.

The data provided by NASA detailing funding of analytical instrumentation through the LARS and PMEF programs over the past 10 years shows that NASA funding generally falls well below the cost of instrument purchases from commercial vendors (see Section 5.2.1).10 Thus, it can be inferred that much of the instrumentation currently used for extraterrestrial sample analysis is funded entirely by or via cost-share arrangement with other funding agencies (e.g., NSF), foundations (e.g., Keck), institutions, or other sources, and is likely also used for analyses of terrestrial samples.

Appendix B shows that staffing of analytical laboratories varies greatly from one institution to another, and from one type of institution to another. Most laboratories undertaking extraterrestrial sample analyses employ one or more highly trained technical staff, as well as postdoctorates and graduate students. Generally, institutional-based funding for technical staff is more readily available at NASA centers, museums, or private research institutions compared to university-based laboratories. This reflects the fact that universities have significantly reduced funding for technical support staff over the past three decades, which has implications for the sustainability of such laboratories, as addressed in Chapter 5.

Lastly, most sample return analyses to date have focused on rocks, minerals, glasses, and metals (hard condensed matter). Future missions, as detailed by the decadal survey, may seek to return gases, ices, and associated organic materials. Whereas the handling and analysis of extraterrestrial organic molecules, both low and high molecular weight (e.g., amino acids to polymeric organic matter) in primitive meteorites and comet samples (comet 81P/Wild 2 via the Stardust Mission) is now very mature in many laboratories (e.g., NASA, universities,

___________________

9 See Appendix F for abbreviations and Table 4.2 for a more detailed enumeration of capabilities.

10 Jeffrey Grossman, NASA, personal communication.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

and private institutions), the handling and transfer of more fragile samples such as ices and gases presents a new set of challenges for both NASA and sample recipients.

4.4.5 Other U.S. Government-Funded Facilities

The United States is the world leader in materials characterization, not only with a breadth of state-of-the-art characterization techniques but also with a broad portfolio of laboratory governance modalities (single-principal investigator [PI] laboratories, regional multi-PI laboratories, and larger multiuser facilities) and funding modes (governmental, nongovernmental/nonprofit, and commercial entities, as sole-funding entities or part of a consortium). As a result, a healthy ecosystem of non-NASA facilities across the nation can provide standard, routine, or specialized materials handling, characterization, measurements, and related capabilities for extraterrestrial materials and their analysis.

The materials characterization enterprise of the United States consists of a diverse portfolio of laboratories at all scales (from tabletop experiment to multiexperiment particle accelerators) with a variety of scopes (serving specific scientific and or technical niches, or covering a range of science or techniques), with a diversity of paths to access (from access based on a personal relationship with the PI to merit-reviewed, proposal-based open access), and funded by a variety of organizations or a combination of organizations (including government, nongovernmental nonprofit, and commercial organizations).

While an exhaustive summary and review of all U.S. capabilities in materials characterization is beyond the scope of this report, in this section a synopsis is provided of the (mostly governmental) organizations that provide a large part of the funding for materials research centers, with particular focus on examples of multiuser facilities that are most pertinent to present and likely future extraterrestrial sample return.

4.4.5.1 U.S. Department of Energy Major User Facilities

DOE is known for historical stewardship of diverse user facilities for high-energy and radiation-based tools, techniques, and measurements. These facilities and associated infrastructure have been developed and nurtured by specific DOE divisions, programs, and initiatives, but they are typically broadly accessible to users (including international users). The access to these DOE facilities often requires a relatively straightforward proposal process, and the facilities provide technical support (staff, data gathering/analysis, etc.) before, during, and after the experiments, together with computational analysis.

Specifically, DOE has significantly invested in and manages synchrotron X-ray scattering, neutron scattering, and electron-beam-based facilities. DOE also operates nanoscale science research centers, which provide user access to synthesis and fabrication of nanoscale structures and systems that will likely be relevant to the sampling/concentrators, characterization, and measurements of extraterrestrial materials analysis.

Some noteworthy and globally unique user facility examples include the synchrotron radiation source and associated capabilities at the APS at Argonne National Laboratory; the National Synchrotron Light Source-II (NSLS-II) at Brookhaven National Laboratory; the Advanced Light Source at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL); the Spallation Neutron Source at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL); among several others partly supported or managed by DOE.

The DOE Office of Science is a useful resource and acts as a “one-stop-shop” for all information related to facilities and infrastructure for instrumentation related to fabrication, characterization and measurements.11

4.4.5.2 U.S. National Science Foundation Facilities and Infrastructure Programs

NSF has invested in the development of state-of-the-art tools for advanced materials research, with direct or indirect applications to extraterrestrial materials characterization through a variety of programs, including within the Directorate for Geosciences, the Division of Materials Research, and in crosscutting programs from the Office

___________________

11 U.S. Department of Energy, “User Facilities,” https://science.energy.gov/user-facilities/, last updated July 2, 2018.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

of Integrated Activities. These include multiuser distributed instrumentation networks and arrays, accelerators, research vessels, aircraft, telescopes, and simulators, among others. In addition, NSF has also invested in Internet-based and distributed user facilities; some of which may be relevant to extraterrestrial materials analysis, archiving, and data analytics.12

In some cases, NSF-supported programs manage major facilities and infrastructure programs for extended duration—for example, the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory. In other cases, NSF partially or fully manages infrastructure programs and initiatives—for example, the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory (NHMFL)13 at Florida State University, which can be used to make high-performance nuclear magnetic resonance measurements to characterize organic molecular structures, and the National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory (NSCL),14 which can be used to generate tracers for tomographic imaging and related radioactive decay measurements. NHMFL and NSCL are unique, unusual, and potentially useful tools and techniques for analysis of returned extraterrestrial samples.

The Directorate of Geoscience (GEO) has several programs and initiatives that support specialized facilities and analytical instrumentation with overlaps with the sample return community. David Lambert, program director of instrumentation and facilities of the GEO provided an overview of these programs to the committee, which include funding of a single PI for instruments costing up to $500,000 through the regular program (e.g., SEMs, quadrupole ICP-MS), or, for more expensive instrumentation (e.g., electron microprobes, large-radius SIMS instruments), through the Major Research Instrumentation program, which provides funding in the range of $100,000 to $4 million. Very expensive instrumentation and facilities costing more than $100 million (e.g., telescopes) can be funded through the Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) program. NSF-funded user facilities within the GEO directorate include the Consortium for Mineral Physics Research in the Earth Sciences (COMPRES), which funds mineral physics research in the Earth sciences, and GSECARS, which provides support for the synchrotron X-ray user facility for Earth sciences at APS. Many of the instruments currently employed for extraterrestrial sample analyses have been partially funded by NSF.15

Other notable NSF programs and facilities relevant to extraterrestrial materials analysis include the National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure (NNCI) program,16 which provides regional nodes of excellence in fabrication, and characterization facilities that are accessible to local/regional, national, and international institutions, as well as to corporations. These are geographically widely distributed and each one has some unique or integrated capabilities often needed to solve a particular materials analysis challenge.

4.4.5.3 National Institute for Standards and Technology Facilities

As part of the Department of Commerce, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) traditionally provides measurements and standards expertise to the scientific, technical, and corporate communities. As extraterrestrial materials handling, analysis, data archiving, and dissemination become more pervasive and globally accessible, NIST may offer unique opportunities for the community to standardize various experimental and computational parameters for more consistent and cross-correlative undertakings.

NIST runs a number of laboratories and operates two key facilities—the NIST Center for Neutron Research (NCNR) and the Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology.17 Several NIST facilities and expertise are available to the broader analytical community and users. For example, the Materials and Measurement Laboratory (MML) serves “as the national reference laboratory for measurements in the chemical, biological and materials

___________________

12 National Science Foundation, “Major Multi-User Research Facilities,” https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2018/pdf/36_fy2018.pdf, accessed December 7, 2018.

13 National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, “Homepage,” https://nationalmaglab.org, accessed December 7, 2018.

14 National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, “Homepage,” https://www.nscl.msu.edu/index.php, accessed December 7, 2018.

15 D. Lambert, R. Kelz, and K. Johnson, 2017, “Instrumentation & Facilities (IF) Program: Division of Earth Sciences, Directorate for Geosciences,” presentation to the committee, November 20, 2017.

16 National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure, “Homepage,” https://www.nnci.net/, accessed December 7, 2018.

17 National Institute for Standards and Technology, “User Facilities,” https://www.nist.gov/labs-major-programs/user-facilities, last updated October 12, 2018.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

sciences,”18 especially related to the certified reference materials, critically evaluated data and analysis, and other programs to ensure and assure the quality of measurements (see Section 2.2.3). MML coordinates the NIST-wide Standard Reference Material and Standard Reference Data programs.

The Precision Measurement Laboratory is involved in the science of “measurement” of diverse kinds. It sets the definitive U.S. standards for nearly every kind of measurement employed in commerce and research, provides NIST-traceable calibrations, and disseminates standards and best practices.

4.4.5.4 U.S. Department of Defense Programs and Facilities

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) science and technology (S&T) enterprise provides basic and applied research support and operates directly or indirectly several facilities and infrastructure programs related to materials synthesis, characterization, behavior, and system- or device-level considerations. The end of this section contains relevant Web portals that provide a broad overview and keyword searchable items for facilities and equipment available for research at the DOD S&T enterprise and related capabilities relevant to extraterrestrial materials analysis.

Some of the DOD laboratories are well known for their unique capabilities for materials research and analysis, which have been developed for many decades. Some notable examples include the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, and Edgewood Chemical Biological Center, which offer advanced technical capabilities and in-house expertise that may be relevant to handling and analysis of future extraterrestrial materials. The NRL has been involved in analyses of Stardust returned samples.19 Other major or unique capabilities include materials, structures, phenomena, systems and their behavior in the context of high-velocity impact, energetic materials and other military-related specialized capabilities and facilities.

DOD laboratories and facilities are typically accessible through collaborative programs or through contact with individual division and section heads, per local protocol and access constraints driven by DOD considerations.20

4.4.5.5 National Institutes of Health Infrastructure and Facilities

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) offer major instrumentation access and capabilities through their intramural program and support to external institutions and consortia. Some of these are called “cores,” which provide centralized and coordinated capabilities for specific biomedical research and development needs. Unlike agencies such as DOE or DOD, NIH does not have or has not invested in widespread physical presence or facilities and infrastructure. However, the cores and facilities affiliated with universities or institutions (at least partly supported by NIH) are spread widely throughout the United States (and outside) and have several modes of user access per constraints of the specific programs or NIH division or institute support. The Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities (ABRF) provides a searchable database of various “cores” and associated tools, techniques, and capabilities for researchers. Some of these programs, initiatives and core facilities will likely have directly relevant experience for extraterrestrial materials and their analysis, especially as future incoming sample return materials will likely include organic or volatile substances, and thus be susceptible to damage during handling and examination.

In addition to primary NIH support, some of the core facilities and specialized instrumentation infrastructure for biomedical research across the United States are partly or wholly supported by foundations such as the Howard Hughes Medical Institute or the Gates Foundation, among many others. Extraterrestrial materials handling and analysis will likely benefit from the aforementioned capabilities, although these are geographically distributed and often invested for specific NIH institute support with specific mandates and goals.

___________________

18 Material Measurement Laboratory, “Homepage,” https://www.nist.gov/mml, accessed December 7, 2018.

19 B.T. De Gregorio, R.M. Stroud, L.R. Nittler, and A.L.D. Kilcoyne, 2017, Evidence for reduced, carbon-rich regions in the solar nebula from an unusual cometary dust particle, Astrophysical Journal 848(2), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa8c07.

20 For a detailed list of DOD laboratories, see www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/laboratories.html. For DOD science and technology listings, see https://www.acq.osd.mil/chieftechnologist/ and https://www.defense.gov/News/Special-Reports/0715_science-tech/. For searchable facilities/laboratories doing basic research at DOD, see http://basicresearch.defense.gov/. All accessed December 7, 2018.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

NIH is now considering infrastructure investment similar to NSF and DOE programs (e.g., the regional facilities model of the NNCI program) in large projects such as Cryo-EM centers, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and related imaging initiatives. These facilities will likely operate analogous to DOE facilities and be accessible to communities and researchers for extraterrestrial materials analysis.

There are also many national biomedical and clinical research centers with extensive facilities and instrumentation infrastructure. In fact, each of the 28 institutes supports centers with research facilities. In particular, the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) may be a useful resource for extraterrestrial materials handling and characterization, as it also supports, nurtures, and (at least partly) manages research facilities.21 Other facilities include the NIH Core Facilities Support Portal22 and the ABRF portal.23

4.4.5.6 Miscellaneous Government-Funded Facilities/Infrastructure

There was a widespread recognition in policy circles in the United States after World War II that “science won the war.” This recognition was further reinforced during the Cold War and led to several public-private partnerships for research and development on behalf of the U.S. government. These are typically administered through the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (Title 48, Part 35, Section 35.017) by universities and corporations.

These federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) in many cases have unique and useful resources for scientific and technical communities. FFRDCs also and often include major facilities, capabilities, and intellectual resources for materials handling, synthesis, characterization, measurements, and systems—quite possibly relevant for extraterrestrial materials analysis. For example, FFRDCs include the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analysis, operated by the Southwest Research Institute on behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which may become an important resource should there be radioactive extraterrestrial materials returned in future missions. Other such niche examples can be found on FFDRCs Web portal.24

4.5 OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL FACILITIES

The scientific study of extraterrestrial materials, including meteorites, cosmic dust, and returned samples, is a well-established field in more than a dozen countries, with noteworthy centers of excellence in Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland. Space missions aimed at solar system exploration, including sample return, are increasingly structured as international collaborations (e.g., Hayabusa2, OSIRIS-REx), with explicit plans for sharing returned materials between nations and dividing laboratory work to meet mission science goals. For these reasons, it will be advantageous to consider existing and likely future capabilities of prospective international partners when defining future investment in U.S. infrastructure for sample return science.

Appendix C summarizes technical data for more than two dozen international facilities that perform analytical science in support of previous, ongoing, or planned near-future sample return missions. The following list summarizes the committee’s findings from review of these data:

  • Instrumentation and technology strengths. The collective analytical instrumentation of the international facilities considered relevant to this study covers every major category of technology and analytical target that can be addressed by existing technologies, including common, commercially available instruments—

___________________

21 National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, “Research Funding NIBIB-Supported Biomedical Technology Resource Centers,” https://www.nibib.nih.gov/research-funding/featured-programs/biomedical-technology-resource-centers/supported-centers, accessed December 7, 2018.

22 National Institutes of Health, “Frequently Asked Questions: Core Facilities,” https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/core_facilities_faqs.htm#3626, last updated April 18, 2013.

23 Federation of American Societies of Experimental Biology, 2018, Instrumentation: Federal Grants and Programs for the Life Sciences, FASEB Shared Research Resources Subcommittee, updated April 25, http://www.faseb.org/Science-Policy--Advocacy-and-Communications/Science-Policy-and-Research-Issues/Shared-Research-Resources.aspx.

24 National Science Foundation, “Master Government List of Federally Funded R&D Centers,” https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/ffrdclist/, last updated March, 2018.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
  • that is, nonprototype versions of microscopes (SEM, TEM, EPMA) and spectroscopies (FTIR/Raman); commercially available common and more specialized mass spectrometry instrumentation—for example, MC-ICP-MS, TIMS, SIMS, and IRMS;25 large-scale user facilities based at national-scale synchrotron X-ray or neutron beam sources; and unique instrumentation specially built for returned sample analyses—for example, the Refrigerator Enhanced Laser Analyzer for Xenon (RELAX) instrument at the University of Manchester.

    The breadth and depth of the analytical capabilities of international facilities are impressive. Most of these laboratories duplicate widely available capabilities present in U.S. laboratories. However, if gaps emerge in U.S. capabilities in the general category of common, commercially available instruments (e.g., through decommissioning or nonrenewal of existing laboratories), it is notable that similar facilities exist in top laboratories doing return sample analyses elsewhere in the world. More importantly, several of the international facilities possess unique or prototype analytical or experimental equipment that cannot be found in U.S. institutions. Examples include the Argus collision cell in the MC-ICP-MS laboratory in Bristol, UK; the RELAX resonance ionization noble gas isotope instrument in Manchester, UK; the high-velocity particle impact laboratory in Heidelberg, Germany; and the breadboard Orbitrap flight instrument (dubbed the Cosmorbitrap) in Université d’Orléans, France. Each of these capabilities represents years to decades of investment and would be expensive to duplicate or supersede.

  • Instrumentation and technology weaknesses. The primary weaknesses of international facilities, as compared to their U.S. peers, from the perspective of this report’s charge, are the relatively small number and brief history of technology development projects directly inspired by and connected to the aims of returned sample science. There are several examples of ambitious, impactful instrument development projects conducted in the United States that grew directly out of sample return mission goals (in some cases even directly funded by sample return missions; e.g., Mega-SIMS and CHILI), and these are just the most recent examples of a long history of engagement between sample return missions and analytical laboratory developments (e.g., the Lunatic class of TIMS instruments in the 1970s). The lack of similar long-term engagement in international institutions puts international partners at a significant disadvantage, at least in the near term, when it comes to organizing and executing programs of technical development in support of sample return missions.
  • Staffing strengths. The committee’s review of international facilities revealed two significant strategic strengths in personnel management: (1) several narrow but scientifically important areas of technical and scientific leadership, particularly in the noble gas geochemistry of extraterrestrial materials (Nancy, France, and Manchester, UK). The decades of excellence demonstrated by these groups could not be readily duplicated elsewhere and are a valuable resource to support collective goals. (2) It is common (although not universal) for international institutions to provide salaried, permanent staff positions to support the construction, maintenance, and use of analytical instruments. This support is strongest in France, Germany, Canada, and Switzerland, where it is common for laboratories to be staffed by highly qualified technical staff whose salaries are paid by the university or government. For example, the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) in France hired 332 new technical support staff in 2016.26 The stability of funding for these positions means these facilities can develop and maintain well-trained and experienced staff and are able to translate their skills from one generation to the next. This level of continuity is important for maintaining the highest levels of technical readiness, particularly for projects such as sample return missions, where the time span from mission conception to sample analysis can be 10 or more years. This model of staff support has largely disappeared in U.S. institutions over the last approximately 20 years, in response to changing financial models for academic institutions and funding goals and models from federal agencies. International partners provide clear examples of the benefits of

___________________

25 See Appendix F for abbreviations and Table 4.2 for a more detailed enumeration of capabilities.

26 Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 2016, “2016: A Year at CNRS, Excerpts from the 2016 Annual Report,” http://www.cnrs.fr/en/science-news/docs/RA2016-en.pdf.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
  • their vision for the connection between support for technology and support for long-term development of the staff who make that technology work.

  • Staffing weaknesses. While each individual laboratory and facility has its unique sets of strengths and weaknesses with regard to human resources, two trends are typical to foreign laboratories’ staffing strategies in conjunction with sample return missions and represent weaknesses in these programs. First, compared with the United States, international laboratories have a relatively short heritage of close connection between the research groups spearheading the sample return missions and the research groups involved in the primary characterization of the returned samples. A second issue is that many European and Japanese academic organizations are strongly hierarchical, with fewer opportunities for promotions. This is an important issue for technical support staff who might also be early-career academics. The culture makes it difficult for junior scientists to advance in their careers over the time scale of a given mission. This serves as a disincentive for early-career scientists to take on the role of scientifically trained technical support staff.

4.6 LABORATORY AND FACILITY CONCLUSIONS

This chapter describes broad classes and thematic categories of analytical instrumentation and capabilities that are used in curation and analysis of existing returned samples and that may be used for future sample returns. This chapter also discusses various national and international facilities and their locations around the world. Specific examples of laboratories in the United States and abroad that house these capabilities are provided in Appendix Tables B.1 and C.1, respectively. Researchers use these instruments and facilities to characterize the physical properties and chemical composition of returned samples. In many cases, the functional behavior or properties associated with the samples can also be determined using complementary analytical techniques, or by using the same instrument in a different manner. For example, the atomic force microscope is often used for “metrology” (i.e., determining the sample size, shape, and related physical measurements). Yet, the same instrument can be used for magnetic force microscopy to map magnetic domain formation in the material, or to help reveal the distribution of magnetic phases across the field of view.

Infrastructure, instrumentation, and facilities are well developed for characterization and analysis of hard sample returns (i.e., minerals, glasses, metals, and rocks). The committee did not identify any techniques or instruments that are highly relevant to current returned samples or missions in flight that are missing or entirely unavailable to U.S. researchers. In some cases, such as synchrotrons with broad mission relevance, facilities are few, but they are generally available to users via peer-reviewed proposals. However, given finite life spans, instrumentation and facilities require continual upkeep and renewal to ensure that the latest technologies and methods are available for characterization and analysis of returned samples.

Samples of soft condensed matter, including organic materials, as well as gas- and ice-based materials, are becoming increasingly important to returned sample analysis. For example, organic materials are important targets for both missions currently in flight to sample primitive asteroids (Hayabusa2 and OSIRIS-REx). In addition, future missions may aim to return ices and gases. Thus, more increased capabilities for the collection, transport, curation, and analysis of such fragile and damage-prone materials and structures will be needed in the future, as outlined in the conclusions below.

Conclusion: The committee’s analysis of analytical equipment available at U.S. laboratories indicates that there is a wide range of instrumentation that is currently accessible for returned sample analyses. There are no obvious gaps in instrumentation for analysis of returned rocks, glasses, minerals, and the current inventory of organic materials.

Conclusion: Missions in flight will not return samples for at least 5 years; therefore, some of the current analytical capabilities will be decommissioned before the samples are available.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×

Conclusion: Future sample return missions are focused on returning and analyzing more challenging materials (e.g., gases, ices, organic compounds) and will require investment in technologies that are not currently widely utilized by the sample return community.

Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"4 Current Laboratories and Facilities." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25312.
×
Page 59
Next: 5 Current and Future Instrumentation and Investments for Extraterrestrial Sample Analysis »
Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $65.00 Buy Ebook | $54.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The United States possesses a treasure-trove of extraterrestrial samples that were returned to Earth via space missions over the past four decades. Analyses of these previously returned samples have led to major breakthroughs in the understanding of the age, composition, and origin of the solar system. Having the instrumentation, facilities and qualified personnel to undertake analyses of returned samples, especially from missions that take up to a decade or longer from launch to return, is thus of paramount importance if the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is to capitalize fully on the investment made in these missions, and to achieve the full scientific impact afforded by these extraordinary samples. Planetary science may be entering a new golden era of extraterrestrial sample return; now is the time to assess how prepared the scientific community is to take advantage of these opportunities.

Strategic Investments in Instrumentation and Facilities for Extraterrestrial Sample Curation and Analysis assesses the current capabilities within the planetary science community for sample return analyses and curation, and what capabilities are currently missing that will be needed for future sample return missions. This report evaluates whether current laboratory support infrastructure and NASA's investment strategy is adequate to meet these analytical challenges and advises how the community can keep abreast of evolving and new techniques in order to stay at the forefront of extraterrestrial sample analysis.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!