Home Thermal conductivity of lunar regolith simulant using a thermal microscope
Article Open Access

Thermal conductivity of lunar regolith simulant using a thermal microscope

  • Naoto Kudo , Shunsuke Watanabe , Tsuyoshi Nishi , Hiromichi Ohta , Sumitaka Tachikawa and Rie Endo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: February 13, 2025
Download Article (PDF)
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Submit Manuscript Author Information
High Temperature Materials and Processes
From the journal High Temperature Materials and Processes Volume 44 Issue 1

Abstract

In this study, thermal effusivity distributions of two polished JSC-1A particles, a lunar regolith-simulating material, were measured using a thermal microscope. The results confirmed that the average thermal effusivity of the JSC-1A single particle was approximately half that of the FJS-1 single particle, a different type of lunar regolith-simulating material measured by a similar method. Also, the thermal effusivities of the existing mineral phases of pyroxene and anorthite in the particles were obtained and were comparable to those reported in the literature. A possible reason for the lower thermal conductivity of JSC-1A than that of FJS-1 could be the differences in the ratio of the mineral phases, and phase boundaries between the mineral phases.

Keywords: JSC-1A; lunar regolith simulant; thermal conductivity; thermal effusivity; thermal microscope

1 Introduction

The Moon is covered with numerous dust deposits known as regoliths. As the Moon is continuously impacted by meteorites and small celestial bodies, regoliths are obtained from the breakup of these bodies and the lunar bedrock. Most regoliths consist of small particles with diameters of less than 1 mm. During spacecraft landing and manned activities, the regolith blows up and causes various adverse effects, including low visibility, malfunction of machinery and equipment, and hazards to human health due to inhalation [1]. When regolith accumulates on the radiator of a spacecraft, it can interfere with the heat-dissipation function of the vehicle, causing overheating and possibly leading to spacecraft failure. Therefore, the thermal interactions between the regolith and the spacecraft should be understood and incorporated into the design of the spacecraft to ensure the success of exploration missions. Thermophysical measurements of lunar regoliths are essential to achieve this objective. Considering the scarcity of lunar regolith samples, such tests are conducted in advance using simulants.

Numerous reports have described the thermophysical properties of lunar regoliths and simulants [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. However, these values were measured for samples composed of multiple particles or rocks and could have been affected by porosity, bulk density, and mineral composition [9,11]. The thermophysical properties of a single regolith particle are required for accurate spacecraft design. Endo et al. measured the average thermal effusivity of a single regolith particle for the lunar regolith simulant FJS-1 using a thermal microscope [12,13,14,15,16], which facilitated the measurement of thermophysical properties over a small area [17]. As such cases are rarely reported, the same method should be applied to other types of simulants and used to investigate the validity of the obtained values for future lunar regolith analyses. Therefore, this study aims to determine the thermal effusivity and conductivity of single-particle JSC-1A, a lunar regolith simulant different from FJS-1, by measuring its thermal effusivity distribution using a thermal microscope. We compared the thermophysical properties of FJS-1 and JSC-1A and discussed the effects of voids in the particles and their mineral phase compositions on the thermophysical properties of single particles.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Sample

A mare-type lunar regolith simulant, JSC-1A, produced by NASA’s Johnson Space Center, was used in this study. JSC-1A is derived from basaltic pyroclastic deposits in the volcanic regions of San Francisco [18]. The main minerals in JSC-1A are plagioclase, pyroxene, and olivine. It comprises particles smaller than 1 mm, similar to FJS-1, and is recommended for use as a matrix for excavation/flow [19]. An SH-3000 instrument (Advance-Riko) was used to measure the specific heat capacity of JSC-1A [20]. The density of JSC-1A was measured using a pycnometer method [21]. JSC-1A powder was sieved to a diameter of 150 μm or greater. The classified particles and ground samples were subjected to X-ray diffraction (XRD) for phase identification. A Cu-Kα ray was used for the measurement. Subsequently, the classified particles and a standard sample of fused silica were resin-filled in a container with a diameter of ∼25.4 mm and mirror-polished with diamond particles to prepare the samples for the thermal microscope. After observing the samples using an optical microscope, a thermal microscope was used to measure the thermal effusivity distribution. The samples were observed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS).

2.2 Experimental apparatus

A thermal microscope enables the measurement of thermophysical properties at the microscale by combining cyclic heating and thermoreflectance methods [11,12,13,14,15,16,17]. Figure 1 shows schematics of the thermal microscope: (a) heating and heat diffusion, and (b) the measurement system. A thin Mo film was deposited on the sample surface and periodically heated using an intensity-modulated heating laser, which caused cyclic temperature changes on the sample surface. The reflectivity of the Mo film also changes cyclically with temperature owing to the thermoreflectance effect. Surface temperature changes can be obtained by irradiating the Mo thin film with a detection laser of constant intensity and by detecting the intensity of the reflected light. A phase difference occurred between the heating cycle of the heating laser and the surface temperature change cycle obtained from the reflected light of the detection laser. The phase difference depends on the thermal effusivity of the sample. Therefore, the thermal effusivity of a sample can be obtained by analyzing the phase difference. The thermal effusivity b is expressed as follows:

(1) b = λ ρ C ,

where λ, ρ, and C are the thermal conductivity, density, and specific heat, respectively. The thermal effusivity of the sample was calculated using a two-layer model of the Mo thin film and sample. The sample was assumed to have semi-infinite thickness and heat diffusion in only the thickness direction. The AC component of the temperature response (T(t), where t is the time) of the sample surface in the steady state owing to cyclic heating (frequency ω ) in the thermoreflectance method is expressed as follows:

(2) T ( t ) = A sin ( ω t − δ ) ,

where δ is the phase difference between the intensity-modulation period of the heating laser and the temperature-change period of the Mo thin film. The measured δ can be used to calculate the thermal effusivity b s of the sample using equations (3)–(5):

(3) δ = 3 π / 4 + arc tan cos h 2 ω τ f 2   β + tanh ω τ f 2 β − 1 + tanh ω τ f 2 cos 2 ω τ f 2   ( β − β − 1 ) tan ω τ f 2 ,

(4) τ f = d f 2 / α f ,

(5) β = b s / b f ,

where d is the thickness and α is the thermal diffusivity. Subscripts f and s denote the Mo thin film and sample, respectively. The spot diameter of the detection laser is approximately 10 μm, facilitating measurements with a high spatial resolution. Additionally, an XY automatic stage provided the in-plane thermal effusivity distribution of the sample.

Figure 1 Schematic of the thermal microscope: (a) heating and heat diffusion and (b) measurement system.
Figure 1

Schematic of the thermal microscope: (a) heating and heat diffusion and (b) measurement system.

2.3 Measurement procedure

In this study, a 100 nm-thick Mo thin film was deposited on a sample surface using an SVC-700LRF (SANYU) instrument. The sample was heated by irradiation using a semiconductor laser at a wavelength of 808 nm, an intensity of 9.55 mW, and a frequency of 1 MHz. The temperature response of the Mo film was measured using a He–Ne laser with a wavelength of 633 nm and an irradiation intensity of 0.55 mW. The spot diameters of the heating and detection lasers were 27 and 8 μm, respectively. Ten measurements were taken over 500 ms at each position, and the average value was considered the thermal effusivity at that location. Measurements were obtained at intervals of 10 μm for an area of 1 mm × 1 mm at 25°C.

The α f and b f values are required before the measurement of the sample to derive the value of b from equations (3)–(5). The measured δ value for fused silica, which served as the standard sample, is used to obtain the α f and b f values. The relationship between α f and b f is as follows:

(6) α f = ( b f 2 / ρ f C f ) 2 ,

where ρ f and C f are the density and specific heat capacity of the Mo thin film, respectively, and ρ f C f = 2.29 × 106 J·m−3·K−1 [15]. The obtained δ and thermal effusivity of the fused silica (1.57 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1) [22] was substituted into equation (3) to obtain the thermal effusivity (b f) of the Mo thin film. The α f and b f values obtained using equation (6) were 9.53 × 10–7 m2·s−1 and 2.24 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1, respectively.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 JSC-1A analysis results

Figure 2(a) shows a comparison of the XRD profiles of the ground and classified (above 150 μm) JSC-1A. No component differences were observed based on the classification (Figure 2(a)). The mineral phases previously reported for JSC-1A include plagioclase, pyroxene, and olivine [19]. Figure 2(b) shows the XRD reference profiles of the reported mineral phases, which are similar to the JSC-1A XRD profile used in this study, and compares them with the JSC-1A XRD profile. All reported mineral phases were anorthite, which is one of the end members of plagioclase, pyroxene, and forsterite, which is one of the end members of olivine.

Figure 2 Comparison of the XRD profiles of the (a) classified (>150 µm) and unclassified JSC-1A and (b) JSC-1A sample and standard profiles of its mineral phases.
Figure 2

Comparison of the XRD profiles of the (a) classified (>150 µm) and unclassified JSC-1A and (b) JSC-1A sample and standard profiles of its mineral phases.

3.2 Thermal microscopic results

Figure 3(a), (b), (e), and (f) show optical micrographs and backscattered electron images (BEI) of particles I and II, respectively, and Figure 3(c) and (d) show the corresponding thermal effusivity distributions. The red frames in the optical micrograph represent the measurement areas. Optical micrographs and BEIs revealed the presence of multiple mineral phases within the particles. A comparison of the optical micrographs, BEIs, and thermal effusivity distributions confirmed the consistent overall shapes of the particles. The transparent areas in the thermal effusivity distribution indicate that the thermal effusivity values were not obtained normally (abnormally large or negative values) because of incorrectly reflected light due to surface roughness. Based on the thermal effusivity distribution of BEI, as shown in Figure 3(c) and (d), the average thermal effusivity value of the area corresponding to the particle was determined and used as the thermal effusivity value for particles I and II. Table 1 lists the thermal effusivities of particles I and II and their standard deviation values. The measured specific heat and density for JSC-1A were 785 J·g−1·K−1 and 2,743 kg·m−3, respectively. Using these values, the thermal conductivity of a single JSC-1A particle can be derived using equation (1), as listed in Table 1. The uncertainty was evaluated according to ISO GUM rules [23]. Uncertainty was classified as type A (statistical) or type B (non-statistical). In this study, the standard deviation of the measurement results for particles I and II corresponds to type A, and the uncertainty derived from the measurement device obtained from previous studies corresponds to type B. The results of this study show that the uncertainty of type A is 4%, while previous studies [12,15] have reported that the uncertainty of a thermal microscope is up to approximately 10% when the material used as the sample has a thermal effusivity of around 1.5 to 2.0 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1. The combined standard uncertainty calculated by taking the mean sum of the squares of these values is 11%; when multiplied by the coverage factor k = 2, it becomes 22%, which corresponds to a confidence level of approximately 95%. Considering these factors, the thermal effusivity value of JSC-1A particles obtained in this study is 1.2 ± 0.3 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1. The FJS-1 values obtained using the same measurement methods are listed in Table 1. The thermal conductivity of FJS-1 was more than double that of JSC-1A, even though both simulants were of mare type. This difference arose from their thermal effusivities, wherein a smaller value was obtained for JSC-1A.

Figure 3 Optical micrograph, thermal effusivity distribution, and BEI for particle I (a), (c) and (e) and particle II (b), (d) and (f), respectively. The areas in (c) and (f) show that the thermal effusivity values were not obtained normally (abnormally large or negative values).
Figure 3

Optical micrograph, thermal effusivity distribution, and BEI for particle I (a), (c) and (e) and particle II (b), (d) and (f), respectively. The areas in (c) and (f) show that the thermal effusivity values were not obtained normally (abnormally large or negative values).

Table 1

Measured average thermal effusivity and conductivity of particles I and II, both particles, and FJS-1, as calculated using equation (1)

Sample Thermal effusivity [kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1] (measured value) Thermal conductivity [W·m−1·K−1] (calculated value)
JSC-1A (this study) Particle I 1.2 ± 0.4 0.7 ± 0.08
Particle II 1.3 ± 0.7 0.8 ± 0.24
FJS-1 [17] 2.4 ± 0.6 2.6 ± 1.3

3.3 Thermal effusivity of each phase

The samples were analyzed to validate the measured values and determine whether the thermal conductivity of JSC-1A was lower than that of FJS-1. Figure 4(a) and (b) show the BEIs and EDS elemental mappings of particles I and II, respectively, as measured by thermal microscope. As shown in the BEI results, JSC-1A was composed of three major phases: (1) a light-gray phase, (2) a dark-gray phase, and (3) other phases. The EDS elemental maps confirm that the light-gray phase (1) has a high concentration of Fe and Mg; the dark-gray phase (2) is abundant in Al, Ca, and Si; the other phase (3) has high concentrations of Mg, Fe, Ca, Si, and Na. The EDS elemental maps and XRD profile in Section 3.1 identified that phase (1) is pyroxene, phase (2) is anorthite, and phase (3) is olivine with other minerals (hereafter referred to as “olivine-dominated”).

Figure 4 BEI and EDS maps for (a) particle I and (b) particle II.
Figure 4

BEI and EDS maps for (a) particle I and (b) particle II.

The thermal effusivity distributions show areas with high thermal effusivity, including yellowish-red areas in the center and upper-left areas of particle I in Figure 3(c) and yellowish-green-yellow areas in particle II in Figure 3(d). These areas are consistent with the pyroxene phase shown in Figure 3(e) and (f). In addition, the yellow-green color of the left half of particle I in Figure 3(c) is consistent with that of the anorthite phase. If the size of the mineral phases is sufficiently large compared to the diameter of the detection laser, the thermal effusivity of the mineral phases in the particles can be confirmed from the thermal effusivity distribution. The thermal effusivity values of pyroxene and anorthite were determined by taking the thermal effusivity values from the red-bordered dashed areas in Figure 3(c) and (d) and calculating their average values. Table 2 lists literature values for the thermal effusivity, density, specific heat, and thermal conductivity of anorthite, pyroxene, and olivine at 25°C. Pyroxene (X, Y)2Si2O6 (X: Na, Fe, Mn, Zn, Mg, and Li; Y: Cr, Al, Fe, Mg, Mn, Se, and Ti) is a solid solution containing various elements. Table 2 lists the representative values of pyroxene in solid solutions of enstatite (En: MgSiO3) and ferrosilite (Fs: FeSiO3). Plagioclase is a solid solution of anorthite (An: CaAl2Si2O8) and albite (Ab: NaAlSi3O8); anorthite is defined as An90-100Ab10-0. Thus, plagioclase can be classified into several types according to the composition ratio of An to Ab, each of which has different characteristics. The thermal conductivity values listed in Table 2 were obtained using the needle-probe method [24,25]. The thermal effiusivities listed in Table 2 were calculated using equation (1) with the literature values of density, specific heat, and thermal conductivity.

Table 2

Literature values of density, specific heat, and thermal conductivity, and calculated thermal effusivities for anorthite and pyroxene

Mineral phases Thermal conductivity [W·m−1·K−1] Density [kg·m−3] Specific heat [J·kg−1·K−1] Thermal effusivity (calculated) [kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1]
Pyroxene 4.34 (En98Fs2) [25] 3,209 (En98Fs2) [24] 752 (En78Fs22) [25] 3.34–3.24
4.16 (En78Fs22) [25] 3,365 (En78Fs22) [24]
Anorthite 1.68 (An96Ab4) [25] 2,769 (An96Ab4) [24] 700 (An96Ab4) [25] 1.80
Olivine 5.06 (Fo2Fa98) [25] 3,320 [17] 843 (Fo100) [17] 3.76–2.40
3.16 (Fo4Fa96) [25] 550 (Fo4Fa96) [25]

En: enstaite (MgSiO2), Fs: ferrosilite (FeSiO3), An: anorthite (CaAl2O3). Ab: albite (NaAlSi3O8); Fo: forsterite (Mg2SiO3); Fa: fayalite (Fe2SiO4).

Table 3 lists the thermal effusivity values of pyroxene and anorthite obtained by calculating the average values of the corresponding parts of the thermal effusivity distribution. Thermal conductivities were calculated using equation (1) for pyroxene and anorthite. The density and specific heat values listed in Table 2 were used to calculate the thermal conductivities listed in Table 3.

Table 3

Thermal effusivity obtained from the thermal effusivity distribution and thermal conductivity calculated using equation (1) of pyroxene and anorthite

Thermal effusivity ± SD [kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1] Thermal conductivity ± SD [W·m−1·K−1]
Pyroxene 2.6 ± 0.2 2.8 ± 0.2
Anorthite 1.6 ± 0.08 1.3 ± 0.003

Comparing the results in Tables 2 and 3, the measured thermophysical properties of pyroxene and anorthite were almost the same as those reported in the literature. The difference between the thermal conductivities measured in this study and the values reported in the literature can be ascribed to the difference in compositions of the mineral phases (pyroxene and anorthite). For example, the EDS results suggest that pyroxene may contain aegirine (NaFe3+ Si2O6) and titanaugite in Na and Ti solid solutions, respectively.

Reasonable thermal conductivities were obtained for anorthite and pyroxene, which were detected as larger phases, suggesting that the small thermal effusivity/conductivity of JSC-1A can be ascribed to the low thermal conductivity of the phases present instead of low measurement accuracy. As illustrated in the BEI images of JSC-1A in Figure 3(e) and (f), a large part of the simulant is a mixed phase dominated by olivine. This mixed phase is not an olivine phase but a mixture of olivine, other minerals, and glass, previously identified as lithic fragments [19]. Consequently, the thermophysical properties of this mixed phase are not available in the literature. In this study, the thermal effusivity of the olivine-dominated phase, as determined from the thermal effusivity distribution, ranged from 0.50 to 1.50 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1, which is significantly lower than the reported value for olivine, 3.76–2.40 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1 [17]. This low thermal effusivity can be attributed to the composite nature of the phase, which consists of fine grains and glassy components.

3.4 Comparison of FJS-1

As shown in Table 1, the thermal effusivity of the FJS-1 particles is more than twice that of the JSC-1A particles. The percentages of the main mineral phases present in each particle were found to be the reason for this discrepancy. Binarization was applied to the optical micrograph (Figure 3(a) and (b)) of a single particle to distinguish between the two colors (white and black), whereby the target phase area is represented in white. The percentage of the mineral phase in a single particle was obtained by dividing the white area by the total area of the particle and then multiplying it by 100. The ImageJ software [26] was used to process and analyze the images. Table 4 presents the results of the study and the reported phase ratios for FJS-1 [17].

Table 4

Main mineral phase ratios of JSC-1A and FJS-1 particles

Anorthite Olivine Pyroxene Ilmenite Pore
Phase ratio in JSC-1A 0.24 0.52 (Olivine-dominated) 0.10 0 0.14
Phase ratio in FJS-1 [17] 0.64 0.24 0 0.12 0

As shown in Table 4, approximately half of JSC-1A consists of olivine-dominated regions existing in JSC-1A particles, whereas a quarter of the FJS-1 particles correspond to the olivine phase. As discussed in the preceding section, the thermal effusivity of the olivine-dominated phase is considerably lower than that of the olivine phase, which may have resulted in the lower thermal effusivity of the JSC-1A particles than that of the FJS-1 particles.

Figure 5 shows the BEIs of several JSC-1A/FJS-1 particles, including the samples for which thermal properties have been obtained (Figure 5(a), (b), (g), and (h))[17]. Figure 5 shows that the BEI of individual particles varies significantly, even for the same type of particle. Figure 5 also shows the presence of more pores in the JSC-1A particles than in the FJS-1 particles. Furthermore, the mineral phases in JSC-1A are more finely disseminated than those in FJS-1. Therefore, the measurements of the JSC-1A particles using a thermal microscope may be affected by the voids and grain boundaries within the particles compared with those of the FJS-1 particles. In addition, the presence of pores cannot be neglected for JSC-1A because they significantly reduce the thermal conductivity of the particles. These results suggest that the type and size of the mineral phase, solid-solution state of the particles, shape of the mineral phase, and ratio of the pores to material volumes may significantly affect the thermophysical properties of a single particle. These factors were considered in the measured thermophysical properties of JSC-1A in this study and should be considered when measuring actual lunar sand in the future. However, as can be seen in Figure 5, owing to the variety of particle shapes and porosities in JSC-1A, we acknowledge that the thermophysical properties reported in this study are specific to the particular sample analyzed and that the number of particles analyzed needs to be increased to ensure statistical reliability.

Figure 5 BEI of (a)–(f) JSC-1A and (g)–(l) FJS-1.
Figure 5

BEI of (a)–(f) JSC-1A and (g)–(l) FJS-1.

Sakatani et al. determined the effective thermal conductivity of the JSC-1A powder under vacuum conditions [9]. In the calculation model used [9], the thermal conductivity of basalt (−9.53 × 10−4 T + 2.40) [27] was used for a single particle because JSC-1A is a lunar regolith simulant derived from basalt. The thermal conductivity of basalt is 2.12 W·m−1·K−1 at 25°C, which is thrice that in this study (0.7 W·m−1·K−1 without pores). We believe that using the results obtained in this study to calculate the effective thermal conductivity of the JSC-1A powder is more appropriate than using the value for basalt.

4 Conclusions

The thermal effusivity distribution of a single particle of the simulated lunar sand simulant was successfully measured using a thermal microscope. Thermal effusivity and thermal conductivity values of 1.2 ± 0.3 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1 and 0.7 ± 0.03 W·m−1·K−1, respectively, for JSC-1A and 2.4 ± 0.6 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1 and 2.6 ± 1.3 W·m−1·K−1, respectively, for FJS-1 were obtained from the measurement results, confirming more than a two-fold difference in the thermophysical properties values despite the same mare type simulant. This difference is ascribed to the larger influence of the grain boundaries and porosity on JSC-1A than on FJS-1. Moreover, the solid-solution state within a single regolith grain may significantly affect its thermal properties. The thermal effusivities of the mineral phases in JSC-1A were determined by combining the obtained thermal effusivity distribution with the results of SEM/EDS and XRD analyses of thermal effusivities. In this study, the thermal effusivities of pyroxene and anorthite were confirmed using the thermal effusivity distribution because these mineral phases showed sufficiently large parts than the probe laser beam diameter (approximately 10 µm). In particular, thermal effusivities of 2.6 and 1.6 kJ·s−0.5·m−2·K−1 and thermal conductivities of 2.8 and 1.3 W·m−1·K−1 were obtained for pyroxene and anorthite, respectively, whose values were lower than those reported in the literature because of the different composition ratios of the solid solutions.

Acknowledgment

We would like to thank Mr. Naoya Sakatani of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) for providing the JSC-1A sample, the Techno Plaza of the Shibaura Institute of Technology for the use of their equipment for the XRD and SEM-EDS measurements and analysis, the Agne Technology Center for the specific heat capacity measurement using the adiabatic continuous method, and Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing. We express our sincere appreciation for this cooperation.

  1. Funding information: The authors state no funding involved.

  2. Author contributions: Naoto Kudo: conceptualization, methodology, validation, investigation, data curation, writing the original draft, writing the review, and editing; Shunsuke Watanabe: data curation, and suggestions of data; Tsuyoshi Nishi: writing review, and acquisition of findings; Hiromichi Ohta: writing review, and acquisition of findings; Sumitaka Tachikawa: samples supply and suggestions of data; Rie Endo: data curation, writing, the original draft, writing the review, and editing.

  3. Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Data availability statement: The data that support the finding of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

[1] Morimoto, Y., T. Miki, T. Higashi, S. Horie, K. Tanaka, and C. Mukai. Effect of lunar dust on humans-Lunar d: Regolith-. Japan Journal of Hygiene, Vol. 65, 2010, pp. 479–485.10.1265/jjh.65.479Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[2] Horai, K. I., G. Simmons, H. Kanamori, and D. Wones. Thermal diffusivity and conductivity of lunar material. Science, Vol. 167, 1970, pp. 730–731.10.1126/science.167.3918.730Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[3] Cremers, C. J. Thermophysical properties of Apollo 12 fines. Icarus, Vol. 18, 1973, pp. 294–303.10.1016/0019-1035(73)90212-1Search in Google Scholar

[4] Langseth, M. G. Jr., S. P. Clark Jr., J. L. Chute Jr., S. J. Keihm and A. E. Wechsler. The Apollo 15 lunar heat-flow measurement. Moon, Vol. 4, 1972, pp. 390–410. https://adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1972Moon.10.1007/BF00562006Search in Google Scholar

[5] Cremers, C. J. Thermophysical properties of Apollo 14 fines. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 80, 1975, pp. 4466–4470.10.1029/JB080i032p04466Search in Google Scholar

[6] Kanamori, S., T. Udagawa, S. Yoshida, and S. Matsumoto. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Space 98, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 1998, id. 462.10.1061/40339(206)53Search in Google Scholar

[7] Wakabayashi, S. and K. Matsumoto. Development of slope mobility testbed using simulated lunar soil. JAXA research and development memorandum, JAXA-RM-05-003, 2006, pp. 1–8.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Schreiner, S. S., J. A. Dominguez, L. Sibille, and J. A. Hoffman. Thermophysical property models for lunar regolith. Advanced Space Research, Vol. 57, 2016, pp. 1209–1222.10.1016/j.asr.2015.12.035Search in Google Scholar

[9] Sakatani, N., K. Ogawa, Y. Iijima, M. Arakawa, R. Honda, and S. Tanaka. Thermal conductivity model for powdered materials under vacuum based on experimental studies. AIP Advances, Vol. 7, 2017, id. 15310.10.1063/1.4975153Search in Google Scholar

[10] Woods-Robinson, R., M. A. Siegler, and D. A. Paige. A model for the thermophysical properties of lunar regolith at low temperatures. JGR Planets, Vol. 124, 2019, pp. 1989–2011.10.1029/2019JE005955Search in Google Scholar

[11] Fateri, M., R. Sottong, M. Kolbe, J. Gamer, M. Sperl, and A. Cowley. Thermal properties of processed lunar regolith simulant. International Journal of Applied Ceramic Technology, Vol. 16, 2019, pp. 2419–2428.10.1111/ijac.13267Search in Google Scholar

[12] Hatori, K., N. Taketoshi, T. Baba, and H. Ohta. Thermorefectance. Review of Scientific Instrument, Vol. 76, 2005, id. 2130333.10.1063/1.2130333Search in Google Scholar

[13] Hatori, K., K. Suzuki, H. Fukuyama, and H. Ohta. An application of thermal microscopes to the measurement of thermal effusivity of films. Heat Trans. Asian Res. Asian Res (Trans.), Vol. 38, 2009, pp. 57–64.10.1002/htj.20227Search in Google Scholar

[14] Okamoto, Y., R. Okada, T. Nemoto, H. Ohta, and H. Takiguchi. A novel measurement method for the simultaneous estimation of specific heat capacity and thermal conductivity. International Journal of Thermophysics, Vol. 33, 2012, pp. 1219–1227.10.1007/s10765-012-1249-2Search in Google Scholar

[15] Ohta, H., K. Hatori, G. Matsui, T. Yagi, S. Miyake, T. Okamura, et al. Thermal effusivity measurement based on analysis of 3D heat flow by modulated spot heating using a phase lag matrix with a combination of thermal effusivity and volumetric heat capacity. Measurement Science Technology, Vol. 27, 2016, id. 115002.10.1088/0957-0233/27/11/115002Search in Google Scholar

[16] Miyake, S., G. Matsui, H. Ohta, K. Hatori, K. Taguchi, and S. Yamamoto. Wide-range measurement of thermal effusivity using molybdenum thin film with low thermal conductivity for thermal microscopes. Measurement Science Technology, Vol. 28, 2017, id. 075006.10.1088/1361-6501/aa72d0Search in Google Scholar

[17] Endo, R., Y. Suganuma, K. Endo, Y. Nishi, H. Ohta, and S. Tachikawa. Determination of thermal effusivity of lunar regolith simulant particle using thermal microscope. Internation Journal of Thermophysics, Vol. 43, 2022, id. 103.10.1007/s10765-022-03031-ySearch in Google Scholar

[18] Schrader, C., D. Rickman, C. Mclemore, J. Fikes, S. Wilson, D. Stoesser, et al. Extant and extinct lunar regolith simulants: Modal analyses of NU-LHT-1m and -2m, JSC-1, JSC-1A and -1AF, and FJS-1. Planetary and Terrestrial Mining Symposium (PTMSS)/Northern Centre for Advanced Technology, Inc. (NORCAT), 2008.Search in Google Scholar

[19] Schrader, C. M., D. L. Rickman, C. A. McLemore, and J. C. Fikes. Lunar regolith simulant user’s guide, NASA/TM, 2010–216446. 2010, id. 038451.Search in Google Scholar

[20] Itagaki, K. and A. Yazawa. Measurements of thermodynamic quantities for CdCl2-PbCl2 and PbCl2-ZnCl2 binary melts by quantitative thermal Analysis in the heating process. Journal of the Japan Institute of Metals, Vol. 40, 1976, pp. 859–865.10.2320/jinstmet1952.40.8_859Search in Google Scholar

[21] Miwa, S. Measurement of powder characteristics (II). Journal of the Society of Material Science Japan, Vol. 19, 1970, pp. 476–483.10.2472/jsms.19.476Search in Google Scholar

[22] Endo, R., H. Hayashi, M. Li, M. Akoshima, H. Okada, H. Tanei, et al. Determination of thermal diffusivity/conductivity of oxide scale formed on steel plate by laser flash method through thermal effusivity measurement by transient hot-strip method. ISIJ International, Vol. 60, 2020, pp. 2773–2779.10.2355/isijinternational.ISIJINT-2020-163Search in Google Scholar

[23] ISO GUM: “Guide to expression of uncertainties in measurements”, ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008.Search in Google Scholar

[24] Čermák, V. and L. Rybach. Thermal conductivity and specific heat of minerals and rocks. Physical Properties of Rocks, 5, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, New York, NY, USA, 1982, Vol. 1A, pp. 305–343.Search in Google Scholar

[25] Horai, K. Thermal conductivity of rock-forming minerals. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 76, 1982, pp. 1278–1308.10.1029/JB076i005p01278Search in Google Scholar

[26] Maeoka, H., T. Fukumoto, A. Sakaguchi, M. Hasegawa, S. Kanai, K. Takatori, et al. Reliability of a software ImageJ in motion measurement use of sit-to-stand movements. Rigakuryoho Kagaku, Vol. 23, 2008, pp. 529–533.10.1589/rika.23.529Search in Google Scholar

[27] Desai, P. D., R. A. Navarro, S. E. Hasan, C. Y. Ho, D. P. DeWitt, and T. R. West. CINDAS Report 23, Purdue University Press, Indiana, 1974.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2024-07-16
Revised: 2024-11-21
Accepted: 2024-11-25
Published Online: 2025-02-13

© 2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Research Articles
  2. Endpoint carbon content and temperature prediction model in BOF steelmaking based on posterior probability and intra-cluster feature weight online dynamic feature selection
  3. Thermal conductivity of lunar regolith simulant using a thermal microscope
  4. Multiobjective optimization of EDM machining parameters of TIB2 ceramic materials using regression and gray relational analysis
  5. Research on the magnesium reduction process by integrated calcination in vacuum
  6. Microstructure stability and softening resistance of a novel Cr-Mo-V hot work die steel
  7. Effect of bonding temperature on tensile behaviors and toughening mechanism of W/(Ti/Ta/Ti) multilayer composites
  8. Exploring the selective enrichment of vanadium–titanium magnetite concentrate through metallization reduction roasting under the action of additives
  9. Effect of solid solution rare earth (La, Ce, Y) on the mechanical properties of α-Fe
  10. Impact of variable thermal conductivity on couple-stress Casson fluid flow through a microchannel with catalytic cubic reactions
  11. Effects of hydrothermal carbonization process parameters on phase composition and the microstructure of corn stalk hydrochars
  12. Wide temperature range protection performance of Zr–Ta–B–Si–C ceramic coating under cyclic oxidation and ablation environments
  13. Influence of laser power on mechanical and microstructural behavior of Nd: YAG laser welding of Incoloy alloy 800
  14. Aspects of thermal radiation for the second law analysis of magnetized Darcy–Forchheimer movement of Maxwell nanomaterials with Arrhenius energy effects
  15. Use of artificial neural network for optimization of irreversibility analysis in radiative Cross nanofluid flow past an inclined surface with convective boundary conditions
  16. The interface structure and mechanical properties of Ti/Al dissimilar metals friction stir lap welding
  17. Significance of micropores for the removal of hydrogen sulfide from oxygen-free gas streams by activated carbon
  18. Experimental and mechanistic studies of gradient pore polymer electrolyte fuel cells
  19. Microstructure and high-temperature oxidation behaviour of AISI 304L stainless steel welds produced by gas tungsten arc welding using the Ar–N2–H2 shielding gas
  20. Mathematical investigation of Fe3O4–Cu/blood hybrid nanofluid flow in stenotic arteries with magnetic and thermal interactions: Duality and stability analysis
  21. Topical Issue on Conference on Materials, Manufacturing Processes and Devices - Part II
  22. Effects of heat treatment on microstructure and properties of CrVNiAlCu high-entropy alloy
  23. Enhanced bioactivity and degradation behavior of zinc via micro-arc anodization for biomedical applications
  24. Study on the parameters optimization and the microstructure of spot welding joints of 304 stainless steel
  25. Research on rotating magnetic field–assisted HRFSW 6061-T6 thin plate
  26. Special Issue on A Deep Dive into Machining and Welding Advancements - Part II
  27. Microwave hybrid process-based fabrication of super duplex stainless steel joints using nickel and stainless steel filler materials
  28. Special Issue on Polymer and Composite Materials and Graphene and Novel Nanomaterials - Part II
  29. Low-temperature corrosion performance of laser cladded WB-Co coatings in acidic environment
  30. Special Issue for the conference AMEM2025
  31. Effect of thermal effect on lattice transformation and physical properties of white marble
https://doi.org/10.1515/htmp-2024-0068
Keywords for this article
JSC-1A; lunar regolith simulant; thermal conductivity; thermal effusivity; thermal microscope
Creative Commons
BY 4.0

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Research Articles
  2. Endpoint carbon content and temperature prediction model in BOF steelmaking based on posterior probability and intra-cluster feature weight online dynamic feature selection
  3. Thermal conductivity of lunar regolith simulant using a thermal microscope
  4. Multiobjective optimization of EDM machining parameters of TIB2 ceramic materials using regression and gray relational analysis
  5. Research on the magnesium reduction process by integrated calcination in vacuum
  6. Microstructure stability and softening resistance of a novel Cr-Mo-V hot work die steel
  7. Effect of bonding temperature on tensile behaviors and toughening mechanism of W/(Ti/Ta/Ti) multilayer composites
  8. Exploring the selective enrichment of vanadium–titanium magnetite concentrate through metallization reduction roasting under the action of additives
  9. Effect of solid solution rare earth (La, Ce, Y) on the mechanical properties of α-Fe
  10. Impact of variable thermal conductivity on couple-stress Casson fluid flow through a microchannel with catalytic cubic reactions
  11. Effects of hydrothermal carbonization process parameters on phase composition and the microstructure of corn stalk hydrochars
  12. Wide temperature range protection performance of Zr–Ta–B–Si–C ceramic coating under cyclic oxidation and ablation environments
  13. Influence of laser power on mechanical and microstructural behavior of Nd: YAG laser welding of Incoloy alloy 800
  14. Aspects of thermal radiation for the second law analysis of magnetized Darcy–Forchheimer movement of Maxwell nanomaterials with Arrhenius energy effects
  15. Use of artificial neural network for optimization of irreversibility analysis in radiative Cross nanofluid flow past an inclined surface with convective boundary conditions
  16. The interface structure and mechanical properties of Ti/Al dissimilar metals friction stir lap welding
  17. Significance of micropores for the removal of hydrogen sulfide from oxygen-free gas streams by activated carbon
  18. Experimental and mechanistic studies of gradient pore polymer electrolyte fuel cells
  19. Microstructure and high-temperature oxidation behaviour of AISI 304L stainless steel welds produced by gas tungsten arc welding using the Ar–N2–H2 shielding gas
  20. Mathematical investigation of Fe3O4–Cu/blood hybrid nanofluid flow in stenotic arteries with magnetic and thermal interactions: Duality and stability analysis
  21. Topical Issue on Conference on Materials, Manufacturing Processes and Devices - Part II
  22. Effects of heat treatment on microstructure and properties of CrVNiAlCu high-entropy alloy
  23. Enhanced bioactivity and degradation behavior of zinc via micro-arc anodization for biomedical applications
  24. Study on the parameters optimization and the microstructure of spot welding joints of 304 stainless steel
  25. Research on rotating magnetic field–assisted HRFSW 6061-T6 thin plate
  26. Special Issue on A Deep Dive into Machining and Welding Advancements - Part II
  27. Microwave hybrid process-based fabrication of super duplex stainless steel joints using nickel and stainless steel filler materials
  28. Special Issue on Polymer and Composite Materials and Graphene and Novel Nanomaterials - Part II
  29. Low-temperature corrosion performance of laser cladded WB-Co coatings in acidic environment
  30. Special Issue for the conference AMEM2025
  31. Effect of thermal effect on lattice transformation and physical properties of white marble
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 23.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/htmp-2024-0068/html
Scroll to top button