Chang'e 5 sample return mission Options

[Phil Stooke]

This is my current understanding of the CE5 landing site based in part on the above paper.

Phil

[Phil Stooke]

A new paper here:

https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-912528/latest.pdf

It describes the radar instrument results at CE5.

Phil

[Huguet]

"CHINA'S LUNAR SAMPLES CONFIRM LATE VOLCANISM, POSE NEW QUESTIONS"
https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/...gbHr0LA.twitter
"A team of lunar scientists led by Xiaochao Che (Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences) analyzed the lead content in two basalt fragments of around 3 to 4 millimeters in size, publishing the results in the October 8th Science. They determined the fragments’ to be around 1.96 billion years old, making them almost a billion years younger than material returned by the Apollo and Soviet-era Luna missions as well as what’s found in lunar meteorites."

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abl7957

Attached thumbnail(s)

 

[Shan]

Change5 Descent stage latest image from LRO on Jun 23rd , 2021. Shadow of Sampling arm is clearly visible in this image..

https://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc/view_lroc/LRO...0/M1379112120RC

[Paolo]

Recently published but unfortunately only available in Chinese:

Overall design of unmanned lunar sampling and return project—Chang’e-5 mission

The Chang’e-5 mission is the aerospace project with the highest complexity and largest technical span in China. In this paper, the mission objectives and main technical specifications of the mission are introduced, and the project technical scheme is described in terms of the system composition, design constraints, and flight profile. The focus is on seven aspects of technological innovation, such as a novel scheme of return of samples of extraterrestrial objects and two sampling modes—surface sampling and drilling. Eight large-scale tests involving mission matching, coordination, and correctness were analyzed. The tests included the re-entry flight test and a comprehensive test of lunar surface landing and taking-off. The results can provide an important reference for other extraterrestrial sample return missions.

[Paolo]

Also note that there are LOTS of Chinese papers on CE-5 design and technology in these journal issues:

https://www.sciengine.com/publisher/scp/jou...1/7?slug=browse
https://www.sciengine.com/publisher/scp/jou...1/8?slug=browse

[Hungry4info]

In-situ detection of water at the Moon with Chang'e 5. 120 ppm in the regolith but a nearby rock had 180 ppm. Lunar interior may have more water.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abl9174

[Thorsten Denk]

Interesting.
Is there also some water detection in the samples brought back to Earth?

Thorsten

[Huguet]

Is there also some water detection in the samples brought back to Earth? Thorsten

I believe this publication on Nature made the analisys:

"Water in CE5 apatite and melt inclusions
We studied a total of 23 basalt clasts (0.2–1.5 mm in size) from two CE5 soil samples (CE5C0100YJFM00103, about 1 g; CE5C0400YJFM00406, about 2 g; Extended Data Table 1)"

"we estimated the water abundance of the bulk CE5 basalts from the modal abundance of apatite and its average water content, because apatite is the dominant water-bearing phase in mare basalts. The modal abundance of apatite in the CE5 basalts is determined to be approximately 0.4 vol%, using the surface areas of apatite in all basaltic clasts analysed (Supplementary Table 1). The average water content and δD value of the CE5 apatite measured by NanoSIMS 50L are 1,921 ± 910 μg g−1 and 578 ± 208‰ (N = 40), respectively"

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04107-9

[Huguet]

The modal abundance of apatite in the CE5 basalts is determined to be approximately 0.4 vol%... The average water content ... of the CE5 apatite measured by NanoSIMS 50L are 1,921 ± 910 μg g−1..."

Correct me if i'm wrong,.. but that means a average of 200 ppm at the apatite part of the samples?

[Thorsten Denk]

I'm also trying to understand it.
On page 50 they write:

"As apatite is the major water-bearing
phase in the CE5 basalts, a water abundance of 7 ± 3 μg g−1 for the bulk
composition of the CE5 basalts was calculated from the average water
content of apatite and its modal abundance of approximately 0.4 vol%"

This is much lower than the 120-180ppm from the other paper or what SOFIA measured (200-400ppm or so).

What is correct now?

Thorsten

[Huguet]

This is much lower than the 120-180ppm from the other paper or what SOFIA measured (200-400ppm or so).What is correct now? Thorsten

I Believe that means we have a 192 ppm of water average on the apatite and they are suposing it can be used as parameter to undertand all sample, despite apatite being 0.4 vol% of the sample... either case i don't realy believe it is practical to remove 200 ppm of water from a stone.. it is 0.02%, this would be 200 liters by each cubic meter of stone.

[Thorsten Denk]

Of course.

I'm asking because I'm working on a system that extracts oxygen from ilmenite with hydrogen and concentrated solar power. The hydrogen in principle is recycled, but there always will be some small losses. But if there are small quantities of water (or other H containing molecules) in the feedstock, than it could be possible to replenish the losses by this source. 200ppm might be enough for that, or at least help.

Thorsten

[charborob]

it is 0.02%, this would be 200 liters by each cubic meter of stone.

Should it not be more like 200 milliliters per cubic meter?

[Thorsten Denk]

Should it not be more like 200 milliliters per cubic meter?

Yes...
0.2 liters
One glass of juice.