How could InSight's seismometers be intentionally and meaningfully “pinged”?











up vote
6
down vote

favorite












I had a friend whose summer job, a long long time ago, was to travel around an unsuspecting rural area, lay a heavy steel plate on the ground, and whack the plate with a sledge hammer. Apparently he also had some kind of seismometer or accelerometer nearby. This was apparently a cheap and dirty way to get some idea of the soil and rock below the surface.



This was on Earth, not Mars.



The question InSight and active pinging of Mars asks about generating artificial seismic events on Mars for InSight's seismometers to listen to. @DrSheldon's answer mentions that this is not part of the plan; that InSight is expected to return meaningful data without this.



It doesn't mean that it wouldn't benefit from it though.



What kinds of schemes might a frugal and/or clever space agency use to generate seismic events that would be meaningful and useful for InSight measurements of Mars?



I can imagine two classes, one to help verify nothing is wrong, so something local perhaps, and the other far enough away to give geological or even planetary information.










share|improve this question




















  • 4




    Maybe inSight could use its own self-hammering mole to generate very small local seismic events
    – Dragongeek
    Nov 19 at 10:35










  • @Dragongeek I think this question can end up with several answers. I didn't know InSight had a mole, but that might be better than a woodpecker! ;-)
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 10:37






  • 2




    @Dragongeek - My idea was to lay down a stick of dynamite, light the fuse and run. But yeah, a hammer works, too. :)
    – Don Branson
    Nov 19 at 17:15






  • 3




    @DonBranson was the running part of your ideas as well? Very clever! :O
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 17:24








  • 3




    @uhoh Not at first. It's all about learning from your mistakes.
    – Don Branson
    Nov 19 at 17:31















up vote
6
down vote

favorite












I had a friend whose summer job, a long long time ago, was to travel around an unsuspecting rural area, lay a heavy steel plate on the ground, and whack the plate with a sledge hammer. Apparently he also had some kind of seismometer or accelerometer nearby. This was apparently a cheap and dirty way to get some idea of the soil and rock below the surface.



This was on Earth, not Mars.



The question InSight and active pinging of Mars asks about generating artificial seismic events on Mars for InSight's seismometers to listen to. @DrSheldon's answer mentions that this is not part of the plan; that InSight is expected to return meaningful data without this.



It doesn't mean that it wouldn't benefit from it though.



What kinds of schemes might a frugal and/or clever space agency use to generate seismic events that would be meaningful and useful for InSight measurements of Mars?



I can imagine two classes, one to help verify nothing is wrong, so something local perhaps, and the other far enough away to give geological or even planetary information.










share|improve this question




















  • 4




    Maybe inSight could use its own self-hammering mole to generate very small local seismic events
    – Dragongeek
    Nov 19 at 10:35










  • @Dragongeek I think this question can end up with several answers. I didn't know InSight had a mole, but that might be better than a woodpecker! ;-)
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 10:37






  • 2




    @Dragongeek - My idea was to lay down a stick of dynamite, light the fuse and run. But yeah, a hammer works, too. :)
    – Don Branson
    Nov 19 at 17:15






  • 3




    @DonBranson was the running part of your ideas as well? Very clever! :O
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 17:24








  • 3




    @uhoh Not at first. It's all about learning from your mistakes.
    – Don Branson
    Nov 19 at 17:31













up vote
6
down vote

favorite









up vote
6
down vote

favorite











I had a friend whose summer job, a long long time ago, was to travel around an unsuspecting rural area, lay a heavy steel plate on the ground, and whack the plate with a sledge hammer. Apparently he also had some kind of seismometer or accelerometer nearby. This was apparently a cheap and dirty way to get some idea of the soil and rock below the surface.



This was on Earth, not Mars.



The question InSight and active pinging of Mars asks about generating artificial seismic events on Mars for InSight's seismometers to listen to. @DrSheldon's answer mentions that this is not part of the plan; that InSight is expected to return meaningful data without this.



It doesn't mean that it wouldn't benefit from it though.



What kinds of schemes might a frugal and/or clever space agency use to generate seismic events that would be meaningful and useful for InSight measurements of Mars?



I can imagine two classes, one to help verify nothing is wrong, so something local perhaps, and the other far enough away to give geological or even planetary information.










share|improve this question















I had a friend whose summer job, a long long time ago, was to travel around an unsuspecting rural area, lay a heavy steel plate on the ground, and whack the plate with a sledge hammer. Apparently he also had some kind of seismometer or accelerometer nearby. This was apparently a cheap and dirty way to get some idea of the soil and rock below the surface.



This was on Earth, not Mars.



The question InSight and active pinging of Mars asks about generating artificial seismic events on Mars for InSight's seismometers to listen to. @DrSheldon's answer mentions that this is not part of the plan; that InSight is expected to return meaningful data without this.



It doesn't mean that it wouldn't benefit from it though.



What kinds of schemes might a frugal and/or clever space agency use to generate seismic events that would be meaningful and useful for InSight measurements of Mars?



I can imagine two classes, one to help verify nothing is wrong, so something local perhaps, and the other far enough away to give geological or even planetary information.







mars planetary-science geology insight






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 20 at 0:11









Malandy

1395




1395










asked Nov 19 at 10:14









uhoh

32.8k16112401




32.8k16112401








  • 4




    Maybe inSight could use its own self-hammering mole to generate very small local seismic events
    – Dragongeek
    Nov 19 at 10:35










  • @Dragongeek I think this question can end up with several answers. I didn't know InSight had a mole, but that might be better than a woodpecker! ;-)
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 10:37






  • 2




    @Dragongeek - My idea was to lay down a stick of dynamite, light the fuse and run. But yeah, a hammer works, too. :)
    – Don Branson
    Nov 19 at 17:15






  • 3




    @DonBranson was the running part of your ideas as well? Very clever! :O
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 17:24








  • 3




    @uhoh Not at first. It's all about learning from your mistakes.
    – Don Branson
    Nov 19 at 17:31














  • 4




    Maybe inSight could use its own self-hammering mole to generate very small local seismic events
    – Dragongeek
    Nov 19 at 10:35










  • @Dragongeek I think this question can end up with several answers. I didn't know InSight had a mole, but that might be better than a woodpecker! ;-)
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 10:37






  • 2




    @Dragongeek - My idea was to lay down a stick of dynamite, light the fuse and run. But yeah, a hammer works, too. :)
    – Don Branson
    Nov 19 at 17:15






  • 3




    @DonBranson was the running part of your ideas as well? Very clever! :O
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 17:24








  • 3




    @uhoh Not at first. It's all about learning from your mistakes.
    – Don Branson
    Nov 19 at 17:31








4




4




Maybe inSight could use its own self-hammering mole to generate very small local seismic events
– Dragongeek
Nov 19 at 10:35




Maybe inSight could use its own self-hammering mole to generate very small local seismic events
– Dragongeek
Nov 19 at 10:35












@Dragongeek I think this question can end up with several answers. I didn't know InSight had a mole, but that might be better than a woodpecker! ;-)
– uhoh
Nov 19 at 10:37




@Dragongeek I think this question can end up with several answers. I didn't know InSight had a mole, but that might be better than a woodpecker! ;-)
– uhoh
Nov 19 at 10:37




2




2




@Dragongeek - My idea was to lay down a stick of dynamite, light the fuse and run. But yeah, a hammer works, too. :)
– Don Branson
Nov 19 at 17:15




@Dragongeek - My idea was to lay down a stick of dynamite, light the fuse and run. But yeah, a hammer works, too. :)
– Don Branson
Nov 19 at 17:15




3




3




@DonBranson was the running part of your ideas as well? Very clever! :O
– uhoh
Nov 19 at 17:24






@DonBranson was the running part of your ideas as well? Very clever! :O
– uhoh
Nov 19 at 17:24






3




3




@uhoh Not at first. It's all about learning from your mistakes.
– Don Branson
Nov 19 at 17:31




@uhoh Not at first. It's all about learning from your mistakes.
– Don Branson
Nov 19 at 17:31










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
17
down vote













The traditional method (as used in the Apollo project) was to crash used SIVB stages into the Moon.






share|improve this answer





















  • Since there may not be too many of those left, nor (at least) an easy way to get one to Mars, I wonder what other item might serve as an SIVB proxy?
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 11:01












  • Any rocket stage would do. Other objects of known weight and impact speed would also be useful. Maybe someone will get to Mars some day with a spaceship that has a huge mass budget that can deliver an impactor.
    – Hobbes
    Nov 19 at 11:17






  • 3




    There are a bunch of landers on Mars due in 2020. digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/future-mars-missions/2 apart the landers, each will probably have at least a heatshield and backshell impacting independently
    – Steve Linton
    Nov 19 at 11:18








  • 3




    There are a lot of spacecraft orbiting Mars right now. It's likely at least one of them will fail during InSight's lifetime, and so the scenario in this answer is quite plausible. +1
    – Dr Sheldon
    Nov 19 at 14:51








  • 5




    This has been tried on Mars with the Mars Climate Orbiter. :-)
    – Martin Schröder
    Nov 19 at 15:13


















up vote
7
down vote













Let's examine what's already on InSight:



InSight components





  • A seismometer (SEIS). It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense windstorms, dust devils, and the tidal forces of Mars' moon. To isolate the sensors from motions of the main body of InSight, SEIS is in its own pod that will be placed a few feet away by a robotic arm, and attached by an umbilical.



    The sensors can be recorded during the "impact" of this placement process, and there is a small chance that something useful could be learned from the results.




  • A burrowing temperature probe (HP3). It will be placed by the robotic arm, and then dig with an impact hammer up to 5 meters depth. The head of the "mole" is attached with a cable that has temperature sensors along its length.



    The vibrations caused by dropping the mole, as well as its digging, could possibly help the seismometer map out the nearby subsurface geology.



  • An X-band radio (RISE). This transmitter and transponder will work with antennas in the Deep Space Network to locate the position (within 2 cm) and velocity of Mars. It doesn't seem to have any moving components to create a seismic "ping".


  • The aforementioned arm. This could be manipulated to "thump" the surface around the lander.


  • Other sensors include pressure, temperature, wind direction and speed, and magnetic field. There is a laser retroreflector on the deck, a color stereo camera on the arm, and a color panoramic camera below the deck. I don't see how any of these could be used to create a seismic "ping".


  • Finally, the usual spacecraft components: landing legs, solar panels, computer, antennas, etc.



Therefore, the spacecraft itself has a limited capability to produce some seismic "pings", which might reveal the nearby subsurface geology. The most revealing observations will be by passive seismology and the other instruments.






share|improve this answer





















  • It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense ... the tidal forces of Mars' moon. Considering Mars' moons are only 7.7 and 14 miles across, that's amazing!
    – Andy
    Nov 20 at 16:21


















up vote
3
down vote













To address the problem with martian atmosphere - maybe an impactor with high explosives could be better. Something like Tallboy bomb.



I think energy of the impact will not be higher than from a meteorite impact. Probably even much less. But intended impact have some big advantage - we know where and when exactly it happened. It can be very useful for calibration of seismic velocities model of Mars.



The main problem is cost, of course. The impactor should be specially designed. Stuff like old satellites or rocket stages is not dense enough and not stiff enough to impact martian surface with enough energy after encounter with the atmosphere. The impactor mission would cost at least 100-200 mln $ including launch.






share|improve this answer





















  • I think impactors (kinetic devices) and explosives can be completely separate and alternative solutions and could be discussed individually.
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 15:31




















up vote
1
down vote













Active seismology was actually used by Apollo 16. Small explosives were detonated to produce artificial seismic waves.



https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_16/experiments/as/




The mortar portion of the Apollo 16 Active Seismic Experiment.



Two experiments, the Active Seismic Experiment on Apollo 14 and 16 and the Lunar Seismic Profiling Experiment on Apollo 17, were performed to determine the detailed structure of the upper kilometer of the lunar crust. Both experiments involved detonation of a series of small explosives. The seismic waves or ground motions caused by these explosions were measured by a network of geophones. On Apollo 14 and 16, up to 19 explosions were detonated by an astronaut using a device called a "thumper" along a 90-meter-long geophone line. On Apollo 16, three mortar shells were also used to lob explosive charges to distances of up to 900 meters from the ALSEP. On Apollo 17, eight explosive charges were positioned during the three EVAs at distances of up to 3.5 kilometers from the LM. These charges had masses of 57 grams to 2.7 kilograms. Both the Apollo 16 mortar shells and the Apollo 17 explosives were detonated by radio control after the astronauts left the lunar surface.



These experiments showed that the seismic velocity (P wave) is between 0.1 and 0.3 kilometers per second in the upper few hundred meters of the crust at all three landing sites. These velocities are much lower than observed for intact rock on Earth, but are consistent with a highly fractured or brecciated material produced by the prolonged meteoritic bombardment of the Moon. At the Apollo 17 landing site, the surface basalt layer was determined to have a thickness of 1.4 kilometers, slightly higher than the 1 kilometer thickness determined from the Traverse Gravimeter Experiment.







share|improve this answer










New contributor




Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.














  • 1




    Thank you for your answer. I've added some of the original information to your post. In Stack Exchange, "link-only" answers are discouraged because links rot over time and so the link-only answers become useless to future readers. I had no idea that astronauts were lobbing mortar shells and "blowing things up" on the Moon!?
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f32104%2fhow-could-insights-seismometers-be-intentionally-and-meaningfully-pinged%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes








4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
17
down vote













The traditional method (as used in the Apollo project) was to crash used SIVB stages into the Moon.






share|improve this answer





















  • Since there may not be too many of those left, nor (at least) an easy way to get one to Mars, I wonder what other item might serve as an SIVB proxy?
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 11:01












  • Any rocket stage would do. Other objects of known weight and impact speed would also be useful. Maybe someone will get to Mars some day with a spaceship that has a huge mass budget that can deliver an impactor.
    – Hobbes
    Nov 19 at 11:17






  • 3




    There are a bunch of landers on Mars due in 2020. digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/future-mars-missions/2 apart the landers, each will probably have at least a heatshield and backshell impacting independently
    – Steve Linton
    Nov 19 at 11:18








  • 3




    There are a lot of spacecraft orbiting Mars right now. It's likely at least one of them will fail during InSight's lifetime, and so the scenario in this answer is quite plausible. +1
    – Dr Sheldon
    Nov 19 at 14:51








  • 5




    This has been tried on Mars with the Mars Climate Orbiter. :-)
    – Martin Schröder
    Nov 19 at 15:13















up vote
17
down vote













The traditional method (as used in the Apollo project) was to crash used SIVB stages into the Moon.






share|improve this answer





















  • Since there may not be too many of those left, nor (at least) an easy way to get one to Mars, I wonder what other item might serve as an SIVB proxy?
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 11:01












  • Any rocket stage would do. Other objects of known weight and impact speed would also be useful. Maybe someone will get to Mars some day with a spaceship that has a huge mass budget that can deliver an impactor.
    – Hobbes
    Nov 19 at 11:17






  • 3




    There are a bunch of landers on Mars due in 2020. digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/future-mars-missions/2 apart the landers, each will probably have at least a heatshield and backshell impacting independently
    – Steve Linton
    Nov 19 at 11:18








  • 3




    There are a lot of spacecraft orbiting Mars right now. It's likely at least one of them will fail during InSight's lifetime, and so the scenario in this answer is quite plausible. +1
    – Dr Sheldon
    Nov 19 at 14:51








  • 5




    This has been tried on Mars with the Mars Climate Orbiter. :-)
    – Martin Schröder
    Nov 19 at 15:13













up vote
17
down vote










up vote
17
down vote









The traditional method (as used in the Apollo project) was to crash used SIVB stages into the Moon.






share|improve this answer












The traditional method (as used in the Apollo project) was to crash used SIVB stages into the Moon.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 19 at 10:48









Hobbes

82.5k2225370




82.5k2225370












  • Since there may not be too many of those left, nor (at least) an easy way to get one to Mars, I wonder what other item might serve as an SIVB proxy?
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 11:01












  • Any rocket stage would do. Other objects of known weight and impact speed would also be useful. Maybe someone will get to Mars some day with a spaceship that has a huge mass budget that can deliver an impactor.
    – Hobbes
    Nov 19 at 11:17






  • 3




    There are a bunch of landers on Mars due in 2020. digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/future-mars-missions/2 apart the landers, each will probably have at least a heatshield and backshell impacting independently
    – Steve Linton
    Nov 19 at 11:18








  • 3




    There are a lot of spacecraft orbiting Mars right now. It's likely at least one of them will fail during InSight's lifetime, and so the scenario in this answer is quite plausible. +1
    – Dr Sheldon
    Nov 19 at 14:51








  • 5




    This has been tried on Mars with the Mars Climate Orbiter. :-)
    – Martin Schröder
    Nov 19 at 15:13


















  • Since there may not be too many of those left, nor (at least) an easy way to get one to Mars, I wonder what other item might serve as an SIVB proxy?
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 11:01












  • Any rocket stage would do. Other objects of known weight and impact speed would also be useful. Maybe someone will get to Mars some day with a spaceship that has a huge mass budget that can deliver an impactor.
    – Hobbes
    Nov 19 at 11:17






  • 3




    There are a bunch of landers on Mars due in 2020. digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/future-mars-missions/2 apart the landers, each will probably have at least a heatshield and backshell impacting independently
    – Steve Linton
    Nov 19 at 11:18








  • 3




    There are a lot of spacecraft orbiting Mars right now. It's likely at least one of them will fail during InSight's lifetime, and so the scenario in this answer is quite plausible. +1
    – Dr Sheldon
    Nov 19 at 14:51








  • 5




    This has been tried on Mars with the Mars Climate Orbiter. :-)
    – Martin Schröder
    Nov 19 at 15:13
















Since there may not be too many of those left, nor (at least) an easy way to get one to Mars, I wonder what other item might serve as an SIVB proxy?
– uhoh
Nov 19 at 11:01






Since there may not be too many of those left, nor (at least) an easy way to get one to Mars, I wonder what other item might serve as an SIVB proxy?
– uhoh
Nov 19 at 11:01














Any rocket stage would do. Other objects of known weight and impact speed would also be useful. Maybe someone will get to Mars some day with a spaceship that has a huge mass budget that can deliver an impactor.
– Hobbes
Nov 19 at 11:17




Any rocket stage would do. Other objects of known weight and impact speed would also be useful. Maybe someone will get to Mars some day with a spaceship that has a huge mass budget that can deliver an impactor.
– Hobbes
Nov 19 at 11:17




3




3




There are a bunch of landers on Mars due in 2020. digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/future-mars-missions/2 apart the landers, each will probably have at least a heatshield and backshell impacting independently
– Steve Linton
Nov 19 at 11:18






There are a bunch of landers on Mars due in 2020. digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/future-mars-missions/2 apart the landers, each will probably have at least a heatshield and backshell impacting independently
– Steve Linton
Nov 19 at 11:18






3




3




There are a lot of spacecraft orbiting Mars right now. It's likely at least one of them will fail during InSight's lifetime, and so the scenario in this answer is quite plausible. +1
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 19 at 14:51






There are a lot of spacecraft orbiting Mars right now. It's likely at least one of them will fail during InSight's lifetime, and so the scenario in this answer is quite plausible. +1
– Dr Sheldon
Nov 19 at 14:51






5




5




This has been tried on Mars with the Mars Climate Orbiter. :-)
– Martin Schröder
Nov 19 at 15:13




This has been tried on Mars with the Mars Climate Orbiter. :-)
– Martin Schröder
Nov 19 at 15:13










up vote
7
down vote













Let's examine what's already on InSight:



InSight components





  • A seismometer (SEIS). It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense windstorms, dust devils, and the tidal forces of Mars' moon. To isolate the sensors from motions of the main body of InSight, SEIS is in its own pod that will be placed a few feet away by a robotic arm, and attached by an umbilical.



    The sensors can be recorded during the "impact" of this placement process, and there is a small chance that something useful could be learned from the results.




  • A burrowing temperature probe (HP3). It will be placed by the robotic arm, and then dig with an impact hammer up to 5 meters depth. The head of the "mole" is attached with a cable that has temperature sensors along its length.



    The vibrations caused by dropping the mole, as well as its digging, could possibly help the seismometer map out the nearby subsurface geology.



  • An X-band radio (RISE). This transmitter and transponder will work with antennas in the Deep Space Network to locate the position (within 2 cm) and velocity of Mars. It doesn't seem to have any moving components to create a seismic "ping".


  • The aforementioned arm. This could be manipulated to "thump" the surface around the lander.


  • Other sensors include pressure, temperature, wind direction and speed, and magnetic field. There is a laser retroreflector on the deck, a color stereo camera on the arm, and a color panoramic camera below the deck. I don't see how any of these could be used to create a seismic "ping".


  • Finally, the usual spacecraft components: landing legs, solar panels, computer, antennas, etc.



Therefore, the spacecraft itself has a limited capability to produce some seismic "pings", which might reveal the nearby subsurface geology. The most revealing observations will be by passive seismology and the other instruments.






share|improve this answer





















  • It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense ... the tidal forces of Mars' moon. Considering Mars' moons are only 7.7 and 14 miles across, that's amazing!
    – Andy
    Nov 20 at 16:21















up vote
7
down vote













Let's examine what's already on InSight:



InSight components





  • A seismometer (SEIS). It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense windstorms, dust devils, and the tidal forces of Mars' moon. To isolate the sensors from motions of the main body of InSight, SEIS is in its own pod that will be placed a few feet away by a robotic arm, and attached by an umbilical.



    The sensors can be recorded during the "impact" of this placement process, and there is a small chance that something useful could be learned from the results.




  • A burrowing temperature probe (HP3). It will be placed by the robotic arm, and then dig with an impact hammer up to 5 meters depth. The head of the "mole" is attached with a cable that has temperature sensors along its length.



    The vibrations caused by dropping the mole, as well as its digging, could possibly help the seismometer map out the nearby subsurface geology.



  • An X-band radio (RISE). This transmitter and transponder will work with antennas in the Deep Space Network to locate the position (within 2 cm) and velocity of Mars. It doesn't seem to have any moving components to create a seismic "ping".


  • The aforementioned arm. This could be manipulated to "thump" the surface around the lander.


  • Other sensors include pressure, temperature, wind direction and speed, and magnetic field. There is a laser retroreflector on the deck, a color stereo camera on the arm, and a color panoramic camera below the deck. I don't see how any of these could be used to create a seismic "ping".


  • Finally, the usual spacecraft components: landing legs, solar panels, computer, antennas, etc.



Therefore, the spacecraft itself has a limited capability to produce some seismic "pings", which might reveal the nearby subsurface geology. The most revealing observations will be by passive seismology and the other instruments.






share|improve this answer





















  • It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense ... the tidal forces of Mars' moon. Considering Mars' moons are only 7.7 and 14 miles across, that's amazing!
    – Andy
    Nov 20 at 16:21













up vote
7
down vote










up vote
7
down vote









Let's examine what's already on InSight:



InSight components





  • A seismometer (SEIS). It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense windstorms, dust devils, and the tidal forces of Mars' moon. To isolate the sensors from motions of the main body of InSight, SEIS is in its own pod that will be placed a few feet away by a robotic arm, and attached by an umbilical.



    The sensors can be recorded during the "impact" of this placement process, and there is a small chance that something useful could be learned from the results.




  • A burrowing temperature probe (HP3). It will be placed by the robotic arm, and then dig with an impact hammer up to 5 meters depth. The head of the "mole" is attached with a cable that has temperature sensors along its length.



    The vibrations caused by dropping the mole, as well as its digging, could possibly help the seismometer map out the nearby subsurface geology.



  • An X-band radio (RISE). This transmitter and transponder will work with antennas in the Deep Space Network to locate the position (within 2 cm) and velocity of Mars. It doesn't seem to have any moving components to create a seismic "ping".


  • The aforementioned arm. This could be manipulated to "thump" the surface around the lander.


  • Other sensors include pressure, temperature, wind direction and speed, and magnetic field. There is a laser retroreflector on the deck, a color stereo camera on the arm, and a color panoramic camera below the deck. I don't see how any of these could be used to create a seismic "ping".


  • Finally, the usual spacecraft components: landing legs, solar panels, computer, antennas, etc.



Therefore, the spacecraft itself has a limited capability to produce some seismic "pings", which might reveal the nearby subsurface geology. The most revealing observations will be by passive seismology and the other instruments.






share|improve this answer












Let's examine what's already on InSight:



InSight components





  • A seismometer (SEIS). It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense windstorms, dust devils, and the tidal forces of Mars' moon. To isolate the sensors from motions of the main body of InSight, SEIS is in its own pod that will be placed a few feet away by a robotic arm, and attached by an umbilical.



    The sensors can be recorded during the "impact" of this placement process, and there is a small chance that something useful could be learned from the results.




  • A burrowing temperature probe (HP3). It will be placed by the robotic arm, and then dig with an impact hammer up to 5 meters depth. The head of the "mole" is attached with a cable that has temperature sensors along its length.



    The vibrations caused by dropping the mole, as well as its digging, could possibly help the seismometer map out the nearby subsurface geology.



  • An X-band radio (RISE). This transmitter and transponder will work with antennas in the Deep Space Network to locate the position (within 2 cm) and velocity of Mars. It doesn't seem to have any moving components to create a seismic "ping".


  • The aforementioned arm. This could be manipulated to "thump" the surface around the lander.


  • Other sensors include pressure, temperature, wind direction and speed, and magnetic field. There is a laser retroreflector on the deck, a color stereo camera on the arm, and a color panoramic camera below the deck. I don't see how any of these could be used to create a seismic "ping".


  • Finally, the usual spacecraft components: landing legs, solar panels, computer, antennas, etc.



Therefore, the spacecraft itself has a limited capability to produce some seismic "pings", which might reveal the nearby subsurface geology. The most revealing observations will be by passive seismology and the other instruments.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 19 at 16:10









Dr Sheldon

3,0931339




3,0931339












  • It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense ... the tidal forces of Mars' moon. Considering Mars' moons are only 7.7 and 14 miles across, that's amazing!
    – Andy
    Nov 20 at 16:21


















  • It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense ... the tidal forces of Mars' moon. Considering Mars' moons are only 7.7 and 14 miles across, that's amazing!
    – Andy
    Nov 20 at 16:21
















It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense ... the tidal forces of Mars' moon. Considering Mars' moons are only 7.7 and 14 miles across, that's amazing!
– Andy
Nov 20 at 16:21




It's so sensitive that it is expected to be able to sense ... the tidal forces of Mars' moon. Considering Mars' moons are only 7.7 and 14 miles across, that's amazing!
– Andy
Nov 20 at 16:21










up vote
3
down vote













To address the problem with martian atmosphere - maybe an impactor with high explosives could be better. Something like Tallboy bomb.



I think energy of the impact will not be higher than from a meteorite impact. Probably even much less. But intended impact have some big advantage - we know where and when exactly it happened. It can be very useful for calibration of seismic velocities model of Mars.



The main problem is cost, of course. The impactor should be specially designed. Stuff like old satellites or rocket stages is not dense enough and not stiff enough to impact martian surface with enough energy after encounter with the atmosphere. The impactor mission would cost at least 100-200 mln $ including launch.






share|improve this answer





















  • I think impactors (kinetic devices) and explosives can be completely separate and alternative solutions and could be discussed individually.
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 15:31

















up vote
3
down vote













To address the problem with martian atmosphere - maybe an impactor with high explosives could be better. Something like Tallboy bomb.



I think energy of the impact will not be higher than from a meteorite impact. Probably even much less. But intended impact have some big advantage - we know where and when exactly it happened. It can be very useful for calibration of seismic velocities model of Mars.



The main problem is cost, of course. The impactor should be specially designed. Stuff like old satellites or rocket stages is not dense enough and not stiff enough to impact martian surface with enough energy after encounter with the atmosphere. The impactor mission would cost at least 100-200 mln $ including launch.






share|improve this answer





















  • I think impactors (kinetic devices) and explosives can be completely separate and alternative solutions and could be discussed individually.
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 15:31















up vote
3
down vote










up vote
3
down vote









To address the problem with martian atmosphere - maybe an impactor with high explosives could be better. Something like Tallboy bomb.



I think energy of the impact will not be higher than from a meteorite impact. Probably even much less. But intended impact have some big advantage - we know where and when exactly it happened. It can be very useful for calibration of seismic velocities model of Mars.



The main problem is cost, of course. The impactor should be specially designed. Stuff like old satellites or rocket stages is not dense enough and not stiff enough to impact martian surface with enough energy after encounter with the atmosphere. The impactor mission would cost at least 100-200 mln $ including launch.






share|improve this answer












To address the problem with martian atmosphere - maybe an impactor with high explosives could be better. Something like Tallboy bomb.



I think energy of the impact will not be higher than from a meteorite impact. Probably even much less. But intended impact have some big advantage - we know where and when exactly it happened. It can be very useful for calibration of seismic velocities model of Mars.



The main problem is cost, of course. The impactor should be specially designed. Stuff like old satellites or rocket stages is not dense enough and not stiff enough to impact martian surface with enough energy after encounter with the atmosphere. The impactor mission would cost at least 100-200 mln $ including launch.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 19 at 12:23









Heopps

3,83611027




3,83611027












  • I think impactors (kinetic devices) and explosives can be completely separate and alternative solutions and could be discussed individually.
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 15:31




















  • I think impactors (kinetic devices) and explosives can be completely separate and alternative solutions and could be discussed individually.
    – uhoh
    Nov 19 at 15:31


















I think impactors (kinetic devices) and explosives can be completely separate and alternative solutions and could be discussed individually.
– uhoh
Nov 19 at 15:31






I think impactors (kinetic devices) and explosives can be completely separate and alternative solutions and could be discussed individually.
– uhoh
Nov 19 at 15:31












up vote
1
down vote













Active seismology was actually used by Apollo 16. Small explosives were detonated to produce artificial seismic waves.



https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_16/experiments/as/




The mortar portion of the Apollo 16 Active Seismic Experiment.



Two experiments, the Active Seismic Experiment on Apollo 14 and 16 and the Lunar Seismic Profiling Experiment on Apollo 17, were performed to determine the detailed structure of the upper kilometer of the lunar crust. Both experiments involved detonation of a series of small explosives. The seismic waves or ground motions caused by these explosions were measured by a network of geophones. On Apollo 14 and 16, up to 19 explosions were detonated by an astronaut using a device called a "thumper" along a 90-meter-long geophone line. On Apollo 16, three mortar shells were also used to lob explosive charges to distances of up to 900 meters from the ALSEP. On Apollo 17, eight explosive charges were positioned during the three EVAs at distances of up to 3.5 kilometers from the LM. These charges had masses of 57 grams to 2.7 kilograms. Both the Apollo 16 mortar shells and the Apollo 17 explosives were detonated by radio control after the astronauts left the lunar surface.



These experiments showed that the seismic velocity (P wave) is between 0.1 and 0.3 kilometers per second in the upper few hundred meters of the crust at all three landing sites. These velocities are much lower than observed for intact rock on Earth, but are consistent with a highly fractured or brecciated material produced by the prolonged meteoritic bombardment of the Moon. At the Apollo 17 landing site, the surface basalt layer was determined to have a thickness of 1.4 kilometers, slightly higher than the 1 kilometer thickness determined from the Traverse Gravimeter Experiment.







share|improve this answer










New contributor




Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.














  • 1




    Thank you for your answer. I've added some of the original information to your post. In Stack Exchange, "link-only" answers are discouraged because links rot over time and so the link-only answers become useless to future readers. I had no idea that astronauts were lobbing mortar shells and "blowing things up" on the Moon!?
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago















up vote
1
down vote













Active seismology was actually used by Apollo 16. Small explosives were detonated to produce artificial seismic waves.



https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_16/experiments/as/




The mortar portion of the Apollo 16 Active Seismic Experiment.



Two experiments, the Active Seismic Experiment on Apollo 14 and 16 and the Lunar Seismic Profiling Experiment on Apollo 17, were performed to determine the detailed structure of the upper kilometer of the lunar crust. Both experiments involved detonation of a series of small explosives. The seismic waves or ground motions caused by these explosions were measured by a network of geophones. On Apollo 14 and 16, up to 19 explosions were detonated by an astronaut using a device called a "thumper" along a 90-meter-long geophone line. On Apollo 16, three mortar shells were also used to lob explosive charges to distances of up to 900 meters from the ALSEP. On Apollo 17, eight explosive charges were positioned during the three EVAs at distances of up to 3.5 kilometers from the LM. These charges had masses of 57 grams to 2.7 kilograms. Both the Apollo 16 mortar shells and the Apollo 17 explosives were detonated by radio control after the astronauts left the lunar surface.



These experiments showed that the seismic velocity (P wave) is between 0.1 and 0.3 kilometers per second in the upper few hundred meters of the crust at all three landing sites. These velocities are much lower than observed for intact rock on Earth, but are consistent with a highly fractured or brecciated material produced by the prolonged meteoritic bombardment of the Moon. At the Apollo 17 landing site, the surface basalt layer was determined to have a thickness of 1.4 kilometers, slightly higher than the 1 kilometer thickness determined from the Traverse Gravimeter Experiment.







share|improve this answer










New contributor




Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.














  • 1




    Thank you for your answer. I've added some of the original information to your post. In Stack Exchange, "link-only" answers are discouraged because links rot over time and so the link-only answers become useless to future readers. I had no idea that astronauts were lobbing mortar shells and "blowing things up" on the Moon!?
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago













up vote
1
down vote










up vote
1
down vote









Active seismology was actually used by Apollo 16. Small explosives were detonated to produce artificial seismic waves.



https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_16/experiments/as/




The mortar portion of the Apollo 16 Active Seismic Experiment.



Two experiments, the Active Seismic Experiment on Apollo 14 and 16 and the Lunar Seismic Profiling Experiment on Apollo 17, were performed to determine the detailed structure of the upper kilometer of the lunar crust. Both experiments involved detonation of a series of small explosives. The seismic waves or ground motions caused by these explosions were measured by a network of geophones. On Apollo 14 and 16, up to 19 explosions were detonated by an astronaut using a device called a "thumper" along a 90-meter-long geophone line. On Apollo 16, three mortar shells were also used to lob explosive charges to distances of up to 900 meters from the ALSEP. On Apollo 17, eight explosive charges were positioned during the three EVAs at distances of up to 3.5 kilometers from the LM. These charges had masses of 57 grams to 2.7 kilograms. Both the Apollo 16 mortar shells and the Apollo 17 explosives were detonated by radio control after the astronauts left the lunar surface.



These experiments showed that the seismic velocity (P wave) is between 0.1 and 0.3 kilometers per second in the upper few hundred meters of the crust at all three landing sites. These velocities are much lower than observed for intact rock on Earth, but are consistent with a highly fractured or brecciated material produced by the prolonged meteoritic bombardment of the Moon. At the Apollo 17 landing site, the surface basalt layer was determined to have a thickness of 1.4 kilometers, slightly higher than the 1 kilometer thickness determined from the Traverse Gravimeter Experiment.







share|improve this answer










New contributor




Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









Active seismology was actually used by Apollo 16. Small explosives were detonated to produce artificial seismic waves.



https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_16/experiments/as/




The mortar portion of the Apollo 16 Active Seismic Experiment.



Two experiments, the Active Seismic Experiment on Apollo 14 and 16 and the Lunar Seismic Profiling Experiment on Apollo 17, were performed to determine the detailed structure of the upper kilometer of the lunar crust. Both experiments involved detonation of a series of small explosives. The seismic waves or ground motions caused by these explosions were measured by a network of geophones. On Apollo 14 and 16, up to 19 explosions were detonated by an astronaut using a device called a "thumper" along a 90-meter-long geophone line. On Apollo 16, three mortar shells were also used to lob explosive charges to distances of up to 900 meters from the ALSEP. On Apollo 17, eight explosive charges were positioned during the three EVAs at distances of up to 3.5 kilometers from the LM. These charges had masses of 57 grams to 2.7 kilograms. Both the Apollo 16 mortar shells and the Apollo 17 explosives were detonated by radio control after the astronauts left the lunar surface.



These experiments showed that the seismic velocity (P wave) is between 0.1 and 0.3 kilometers per second in the upper few hundred meters of the crust at all three landing sites. These velocities are much lower than observed for intact rock on Earth, but are consistent with a highly fractured or brecciated material produced by the prolonged meteoritic bombardment of the Moon. At the Apollo 17 landing site, the surface basalt layer was determined to have a thickness of 1.4 kilometers, slightly higher than the 1 kilometer thickness determined from the Traverse Gravimeter Experiment.








share|improve this answer










New contributor




Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 hours ago









uhoh

32.8k16112401




32.8k16112401






New contributor




Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 2 hours ago









Shane L. Edelkind

111




111




New contributor




Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Shane L. Edelkind is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    Thank you for your answer. I've added some of the original information to your post. In Stack Exchange, "link-only" answers are discouraged because links rot over time and so the link-only answers become useless to future readers. I had no idea that astronauts were lobbing mortar shells and "blowing things up" on the Moon!?
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago














  • 1




    Thank you for your answer. I've added some of the original information to your post. In Stack Exchange, "link-only" answers are discouraged because links rot over time and so the link-only answers become useless to future readers. I had no idea that astronauts were lobbing mortar shells and "blowing things up" on the Moon!?
    – uhoh
    2 hours ago








1




1




Thank you for your answer. I've added some of the original information to your post. In Stack Exchange, "link-only" answers are discouraged because links rot over time and so the link-only answers become useless to future readers. I had no idea that astronauts were lobbing mortar shells and "blowing things up" on the Moon!?
– uhoh
2 hours ago




Thank you for your answer. I've added some of the original information to your post. In Stack Exchange, "link-only" answers are discouraged because links rot over time and so the link-only answers become useless to future readers. I had no idea that astronauts were lobbing mortar shells and "blowing things up" on the Moon!?
– uhoh
2 hours ago


















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f32104%2fhow-could-insights-seismometers-be-intentionally-and-meaningfully-pinged%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Сан-Квентин

8-я гвардейская общевойсковая армия

Алькесар