Apollo lunar regolith (returned and in-situ properties)
Not one compound: crushed rock, mineral and impact-glass fragments, mainly plagioclase, pyroxene, olivine, ilmenite and glass
Apollo lunar regolith is the loose layer of broken rock and soil that covers the Moon.
Evidence level
2 of 5
Lab-measured
- 0Predicted only. No one has made it, or no measurement exists.
- 1Calculated. Only calculated or predicted values from sources.
- 2Lab-measured. Measured properties with their conditions stated.
- 3Space-relevant tests. Measured in conditions relevant to space, such as vacuum or atomic oxygen.
- 4Ground-qualified. Qualified for an application on the ground.
- 5Flown or field-proven. Flight or field results exist.
Recipe, share of the weight
- - not statedPlagioclase feldspar
- - not statedPyroxene
- - not statedOlivine
- - not statedIlmenite
- - not statedGlass
Best for
Reference values for lunar surface soil in landing, excavation and rover design, and as the target that lunar simulants are built to match
Weakest at
Not one material: density, strength and composition change with depth and region, and no crystalline silica value for returned Apollo soil was found in the sources read
Risk at a glance
- People No data. No hazard data recorded
- If it fails Moderate. Single surface strength used for deeper design
- Corrosion No data. No corrosion data recorded
Quick facts: Apollo lunar regolith (returned and in-situ properties)
| Property | Value | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Density | 1.3 to 2.29 g/cm³ | 5 sourced values across conditions |
What is the density of Apollo lunar regolith?
Apollo lunar regolith has a density of 1.3 to 2.29 g/cm³. The range covers 5 sourced values across the tempers, forms and test conditions the sources report; room-temperature values are used where a source states a temperature.
What is Apollo lunar regolith used for?
Uses recorded in the sources include Footpad and foundation design (Winkler soil model); Rover wheel-soil interaction; Geopolymer concrete from regolith (research).
Why it exists
Apollo lunar regolith is the reference for how lunar soil behaves. Twelve Apollo astronauts collected 362 kg of rock and soil from six landing sites, and the returned samples are the ground truth that simulants are compared with. Connolly and Carrier also used Apollo bootprints and Lunokhod penetrometer tests to estimate how density and strength grow with depth, which matters for landers, footpads and rovers. The users guide notes that most Apollo grain-size curves cover only the fraction under 1 cm.
Where it's used
Landing and footpad design
Connolly and Carrier use the Winkler soil model on the Moon to analyze footpad-soil interaction during landing, with Apollo bootprint and Lunokhod data as inputs.
Rover wheel-soil interaction
The same abstract applies the Winkler model to wheel-soil interaction of a roving vehicle.
Geopolymer concrete research
Collins et al. describe regolith in its as-is condition as the bulk of the mass for geopolymer lunar concrete, but say simulants are the only way to progress that work.
Recipe
Not one compound: crushed rock, mineral and impact-glass fragments, mainly plagioclase, pyroxene, olivine, ilmenite and glass
Apollo lunar regolith is not a compound. It is a mixture of crushed rock and mineral fragments, plus glass formed by micrometeorite impacts, and its mineral mix depends on the region. The users guide gives regional averages from Apollo returned samples. Wikipedia reports that seven elements make up 98-99% of the composition of lunar rocks and soil.
| Ingredient | Share of the weight | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| Plagioclase feldspar - | not stated | The main mineral in highland soil; the rock-forming feldspar of the Moon's crust. |
| Pyroxene - | not stated | The main mafic mineral in mare soil. |
| Olivine - | not stated | A minor mineral that varies with region. |
| Ilmenite - | not stated | An iron-titanium oxide; its share is what separates high-Ti mare soil from highland soil. |
| Glass - | not stated | Formed by micrometeorite impacts and welded to other fragments (Wikipedia lunar soil). |
Weight shares are as printed in the sources.
What it can do
Show how density grows with depth
1.30 g/cm3 at the surface and 1.92 g/cm3 below a depth of 100 cm (Connolly and Carrier, LPSC 2023).
Give a depth-dependent strength range
cohesion 0.52 kPa at 0-15 cm and 3.0 kPa at 30-60 cm, with friction angle 42 degrees and 54 degrees over the same depths (users guide Table 18).
Compare regional mineral content
plagioclase feldspar is 59.05 wt% in the highlands, while glass is 32.98 wt% in low-Ti mare (users guide Table 3).
Give the bulk shape of Apollo grains
aspect ratio 0.7 and root form factor 0.94 (Cannon and Walker 2021, as printed in the users guide Table 12).
How it compares
Apollo lunar regolith is the reference that simulants are built to match, not a simulant itself. Users guide Table 15 gives mission density ranges from 1.36 to 2.29 g/cm3 for Apollo 15 and Apollo 17 rows, which shows the spread between sites. The table compares density, cohesion and friction angle with the same benchmarks used for the simulant profiles in this collection.
The same measurements for each material, so you can compare them. Each row names the key condition under the value; the full conditions and methods are in the numbered notes under Technical details.
| Measurement | Apollo lunar regolith (returned and in-situ properties) |
|---|---|
| Physical and electrical | |
| Lunar regolith density, Apollo 12 (rho min and rho max) | 1.55 to 1.9 g/cm³1 |
| Lunar regolith density, Apollo 15 (rho min and rho max) | 1.36 to 1.85 g/cm³2 |
| Lunar regolith density, Apollo 17 (rho min and rho max) | 1.57 to 2.29 g/cm³3 |
| Bulk density at the lunar surface | 1.3 g/cm³4 |
| Bulk density below 100 cm depth | 1.92 g/cm³5 |
| Other measurements | |
| Cohesion, 0-15 cm depth (average) | 0.52 kPa6 |
| Cohesion, 30-60 cm depth (average) | 3 kPa7 |
| Angle of internal friction, 0-15 cm depth (average) | 42 °8 |
| Angle of internal friction, 30-60 cm depth (average) | 54 °9 |
| Angle of internal friction estimated from Apollo experiments | 30 to 50 °10 |
| Modulus of subgrade reaction k, Apollo bootprint average | 920 Pa/mm11 |
| Average bootprint depth from the Apollo bootprint analysis | 7.6 mm12 |
| Thickness of the loosely consolidated upper regolith layerRange stated in a conference abstract | 10 to 15 cm |
| Amorphous (glass) content, Apollo 15 average | 38.6 %13 |
| Amorphous (glass) content, Apollo 17 average | 31.1 %14 |
| Glass, modal content (low-Ti mare regional average) | 32.98 wt%15 |
| Plagioclase feldspar, modal content (highlands regional average) | 59.05 wt%16 |
| Silicon dioxide, highlands surface regional average | 45.62 wt%17 |
| Aluminium oxide, highlands surface regional average | 24.47 wt%18 |
| Titanium dioxide, high-Ti mare surface regional average | 7.48 wt%19 |
| Median particle size (Q50), low-Ti mare Apollo samples | 65.1 µm20 |
| Median particle size (Q50), highlands Apollo samples | 118.8 µm21 |
| Particle aspect ratio, Apollo samples (bulk value) | 0.7 -22 |
| Root form factor, Apollo samples (bulk value) | 0.94 -23 |
| Agglutinate content of lunar regolith, as summarised from previous studies | 15 to 60 wt%24 |
Why choose it, and why not
Good for
- Reference values for lunar surface soil in landing, excavation and rover design (Connolly and Carrier).
- Setting the target properties that lunar simulants should match, using averaged Apollo data (users guide).
Watch out for
- Density, strength and composition change with depth and region, so one value does not describe all lunar soil.
- Crystalline silica of returned Apollo soil is not measured in any source read.
- The mass returned by Apollo differs by source: 362 kg in the users guide against approximately 382 kg in the 2019 dissertation.
Apollo lunar regolith is the reference for lunar soil properties, but the sources read give depth- and region-specific averages rather than one value. No source read tests it under lunar vacuum or thermal cycling.
Technical details
For scientists and researchers. Everything above comes from the record below: every number with its method, its conditions and its source.
Notes
The method, full conditions and any caveat for the numbered rows above.
| # | Measurement | Method | Conditions | Caveat |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lunar regolith density, Apollo 12 (rho min and rho max) | Averaged value printed in the users guide density table, Apollo 12 row | basis averaged reference row for Apollo 12 cited to Houston and Mitchell, 1971note rho(min) and rho(max) as printed; the table does not restate their definitions | — |
| 2 | Lunar regolith density, Apollo 15 (rho min and rho max) | Averaged value printed in the users guide density table, Apollo 15 row | basis averaged reference row for Apollo 15 cited to Carrier et al. 1972a and Mitchell et al. 1972anote rho(min) and rho(max) as printed | — |
| 3 | Lunar regolith density, Apollo 17 (rho min and rho max) | Averaged value printed in the users guide density table, Apollo 17 row | basis averaged reference row for Apollo 17 cited to Mitchell et al. 1973anote rho(min) and rho(max) as printed | — |
| 4 | Bulk density at the lunar surface | Approximate value stated in a conference abstract | depth surfacebasis approximate average from the Connolly and Carrier model fitted to Apollo bootprint and Lunokhod penetrometer data | — |
| 5 | Bulk density below 100 cm depth | Approximate value stated in a conference abstract | depth below 100 cm, approached asymptoticallybasis approximate value from the Connolly and Carrier model | — |
| 6 | Cohesion, 0-15 cm depth (average) | Average printed in the users guide cohesion and friction table | depth range cm 0-15range printed 0.44-0.62 kPabasis averaged reference data modified from Carrier et al. 1999, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 7 | Cohesion, 30-60 cm depth (average) | Average printed in the users guide cohesion and friction table | depth range cm 30-60range printed 2.40-3.80 kPabasis averaged reference data modified from Carrier et al. 1999, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 8 | Angle of internal friction, 0-15 cm depth (average) | Average printed in the users guide cohesion and friction table | depth range cm 0-15range printed 41-43 degreesbasis averaged reference data modified from Carrier et al. 1999, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 9 | Angle of internal friction, 30-60 cm depth (average) | Average printed in the users guide cohesion and friction table | depth range cm 30-60range printed 52-55 degreesbasis averaged reference data modified from Carrier et al. 1999, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 10 | Angle of internal friction estimated from Apollo experiments | Range stated in a conference abstract, citing the Apollo estimate | basis range given as the Apollo experiments estimate; the authors say it did not allow for the increase of friction angle with depth | — |
| 11 | Modulus of subgrade reaction k, Apollo bootprint average | Average k from the bootprint analysis, as stated by the authors | basis average over 776 Apollo bootprints, each treated as a plate-load teststress approximately 7,000 Pa from one astronaut standing on one foot | — |
| 12 | Average bootprint depth from the Apollo bootprint analysis | Calculated by the authors from the stress and k values they report | basis calculated by the authors as stress over modulus, 7000 Pa divided by 920 Pa/mm | — |
| 13 | Amorphous (glass) content, Apollo 15 average | Average printed in the Apollo amorphous content table | basis average of Apollo 15 soil samples compiled from Taylor et al. 2019, as printed on the slidesample returned lunar soil | — |
| 14 | Amorphous (glass) content, Apollo 17 average | Average printed in the Apollo amorphous content table | basis average of Apollo 17 soil samples compiled from Taylor et al. 2019, as printed on the slidesample returned lunar soil | — |
| 15 | Glass, modal content (low-Ti mare regional average) | Averaged value printed in the users guide modal mineralogy table | region Low-Ti marebasis averaged regional value from Apollo returned sample XRD by Taylor et al. 2019, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 16 | Plagioclase feldspar, modal content (highlands regional average) | Averaged value printed in the users guide modal mineralogy table | region Highlandsbasis averaged regional value from Apollo returned sample XRD by Taylor et al. 2019, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 17 | Silicon dioxide, highlands surface regional average | Averaged value printed in the users guide bulk chemistry table | region Highlands surfacebasis averaged regional oxide chemistry from Apollo returned sample studies, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 18 | Aluminium oxide, highlands surface regional average | Averaged value printed in the users guide bulk chemistry table | region Highlands surfacebasis averaged regional oxide chemistry from Apollo returned sample studies, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 19 | Titanium dioxide, high-Ti mare surface regional average | Averaged value printed in the users guide bulk chemistry table | region High-Ti mare surfacebasis averaged regional oxide chemistry from Apollo returned sample studies, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 20 | Median particle size (Q50), low-Ti mare Apollo samples | Average printed in the users guide particle size distribution table | region Low-Ti marebasis average Q50 of % passing grains from Apollo returned samples (Graf 1993), per the users guide; most published Apollo curves cover only the fraction under 1 cm | — |
| 21 | Median particle size (Q50), highlands Apollo samples | Average printed in the users guide particle size distribution table | region Highlandsbasis average Q50 of % passing grains from Apollo returned samples (Graf 1993), per the users guide; most published Apollo curves cover only the fraction under 1 cm | — |
| 22 | Particle aspect ratio, Apollo samples (bulk value) | Bulk reference value printed in the users guide particle geometry table | basis bulk value averaged over measured Apollo samples by Cannon and Walker 2021, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 23 | Root form factor, Apollo samples (bulk value) | Bulk reference value printed in the users guide particle geometry table | basis bulk value averaged over measured Apollo samples by Cannon and Walker 2021, as printed in the users guide | — |
| 24 | Agglutinate content of lunar regolith, as summarised from previous studies | Range stated in an arXiv paper, citing earlier lunar regolith studies | basis range given by the authors for previous studies of lunar regolith; printed as percent by weightnote a summary of earlier work, not one Apollo sample set | — |
Corrosion and compatibility
What happens when it meets other materials and environments.
| Environment | Concern | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| Lunar surface micrometeorite bombardment (space weathering of the top layer) | not rated | The sources describe the top layer as gardened by micrometeorite impacts, but none gives a corrosion or degradation rate for lunar regolith.1 |
| # | Environment | Details | Test conditions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lunar surface micrometeorite bombardment (space weathering of the top layer) | Connolly and Carrier describe the lunar surface as a 10-15 cm upper layer of loosely consolidated regolith gardened by micrometeorite flux. The Wikipedia lunar soil article says glass and agglutinate particles form at the surface through impact melting and micrometeorite welding. No source read gives a rate of change or a measured degradation for this layer. | basis descriptive statements of formation; no measured degradation test in the sources read |
Risks and side effects
Hazards to people, what happens when a cell overheats, and how the material is handled and stored.
For people
No GHS classification or safety data sheet for returned Apollo regolith was found. The users guide gives silica and dust hazard statements written for simulants.
- Crystalline silica
- No Apollo sample is in the users guide silica summary, so the crystalline silica content of returned Apollo soil is unknown from the sources read.
- Respirable dust
- The users guide says chronic inhalation of respirable (under 10 microns) particulates can lead to pneumoconiosis, including silicosis.
- Exposure limit
- NASA sets 0.025 mg/m3 (25 µg/m3) as an 8-hour TWA limit for respirable crystalline silica, which is also the OSHA action level (users guide, Section 5.6).
For a rover or test bed
Strength and density change with depth, so a single surface value can mislead a design.
- Depth
- Cohesion averages 0.52 kPa at 0-15 cm and 3.0 kPa at 30-60 cm (users guide Table 18).
- Density
- Bulk density is about 1.30 g/cm3 at the surface and 1.92 g/cm3 below 100 cm (Connolly and Carrier).
Handling and storage
- Cleaning
- For loose simulants, the users guide advises wet wiping or HEPA vacuuming of work areas. No Apollo-specific instruction was found.
- Monitoring
- The users guide says exposure monitoring is the only method to determine occupational exposure to crystalline silica.
Test details
The original wording and numbers from the sources, for readers who want them.
Failure risks
| Failure | Trigger and consequence |
|---|---|
| Single surface strength used for deeper designmoderate severity | Using a surface value for cohesion or friction angle in a design that reaches below 15 cmCohesion averages 0.52 kPa at 0-15 cm and 3.0 kPa at 30-60 cm, and friction angle averages 42 degrees at 0-15 cm and 54 degrees at 30-60 cm (Carrier et al. 1999 values in the users guide). |
| Lighter surface soil underestimated for landing loadslow severity | Landing footpad or foundation design that uses surface density for the full depthBulk density is about 1.30 g/cm3 at the surface and rises to 1.92 g/cm3 below 100 cm, so a surface density underestimates deeper bearing soil (Connolly and Carrier). |
Side effects on surrounding parts
| Affects | Effect |
|---|---|
| Workers and test areas | The users guide notes that handling large crystalline silica particles (over 100 microns) can generate respirable particles (under 10 microns). |
Handling and storage
- For loose simulants, the users guide advises frequent cleaning of work areas by wet wiping or HEPA vacuuming. No Apollo-specific handling rule was found.
Mitigations
- The users guide says exposure monitoring is the only method to determine occupational exposure to crystalline silica.
Supply and geography
How common the raw materials are and where they come from.
Returned Apollo lunar samples
362 kg (842 lb.) of lunar rock and soil collected by twelve Apollo astronauts, per the users guide. The 2019 Ogunyinka dissertation gives approximately 382 kg of Moon rock returned by Apollo. Both are recorded side by side.
In-situ lunar regolith
No tonnage or resource estimate for lunar regolith was found in the sources read.
Documents
Datasheets, safety data sheets, papers and standards you can open.
Full record
The complete spore, as stored. Free to reuse under CC-BY-4.0. Images keep the licence shown with each one.
Show the full YAML
spore: profile
id: apollo-lunar-regolith
spore_version: 0.2
family: regolith
name: Apollo lunar regolith (returned and in-situ properties)
role: Reference lunar soil from the Apollo missions (returned samples plus Apollo and Lunokhod in-situ measurements), not a simulant
category: regolith
type: lunar-simulants
summary: Apollo lunar regolith is the loose layer of broken rock and soil that covers the Moon. Its bulk density is about 1.30 g/cm3 at the surface and rises to 1.92 g/cm3 below 100 cm (Connolly and Carrier, LPSC 2023). Twelve Apollo astronauts collected 362 kg of rock and soil from six landing sites, per the NASA users guide.
best_for: Reference values for lunar surface soil in landing, excavation and rover design, and as the target that lunar simulants are built to match
weakest_at: 'Not one material: density, strength and composition change with depth and region, and no crystalline silica value for returned Apollo soil was found in the sources read'
identity:
formula: 'Not one compound: crushed rock, mineral and impact-glass fragments, mainly plagioclase, pyroxene, olivine, ilmenite and glass'
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Section 1.0 (Introduction) and Table 3 (averaged regional lunar modal mineralogy, Apollo returned samples)
tags:
environments:
- lunar-day
- lunar-night
stresses: []
applications:
- structures
- in-space-manufacturing
- rovers-and-surface-systems
properties:
- benchmark: density
label: Lunar regolith density, Apollo 12 (rho min and rho max)
value: 1.55
value_high: 1.9
bound: range
unit: g/cm3
scope: material
conditions:
basis: averaged reference row for Apollo 12 cited to Houston and Mitchell, 1971
note: rho(min) and rho(max) as printed; the table does not restate their definitions
method: Averaged value printed in the users guide density table, Apollo 12 row
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 15 (Lunar regolith density values, g/cm3), Apollo 12 row, Houston and Mitchell 1971
- benchmark: density
label: Lunar regolith density, Apollo 15 (rho min and rho max)
value: 1.36
value_high: 1.85
bound: range
unit: g/cm3
scope: material
conditions:
basis: averaged reference row for Apollo 15 cited to Carrier et al. 1972a and Mitchell et al. 1972a
note: rho(min) and rho(max) as printed
method: Averaged value printed in the users guide density table, Apollo 15 row
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 15 (Lunar regolith density values, g/cm3), Apollo 15 row, first reference line
- benchmark: density
label: Lunar regolith density, Apollo 17 (rho min and rho max)
value: 1.57
value_high: 2.29
bound: range
unit: g/cm3
scope: material
conditions:
basis: averaged reference row for Apollo 17 cited to Mitchell et al. 1973a
note: rho(min) and rho(max) as printed
method: Averaged value printed in the users guide density table, Apollo 17 row
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 15 (Lunar regolith density values, g/cm3), Apollo 17 row, first reference line
- benchmark: density
label: Bulk density at the lunar surface
value: 1.3
unit: g/cm3
scope: material
conditions:
depth: surface
basis: approximate average from the Connolly and Carrier model fitted to Apollo bootprint and Lunokhod penetrometer data
method: Approximate value stated in a conference abstract
status: ground
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, 'Modeling Lunar Regolith as a Function of Depth', first paragraph
- benchmark: density
label: Bulk density below 100 cm depth
value: 1.92
unit: g/cm3
scope: material
conditions:
depth: below 100 cm, approached asymptotically
basis: approximate value from the Connolly and Carrier model
method: Approximate value stated in a conference abstract
status: ground
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, 'Modeling Lunar Regolith as a Function of Depth', first paragraph
- benchmark: cohesion
label: Cohesion, 0-15 cm depth (average)
value: 0.52
unit: kPa
scope: material
conditions:
depth_range_cm: 0-15
range_printed: 0.44-0.62 kPa
basis: averaged reference data modified from Carrier et al. 1999, as printed in the users guide
method: Average printed in the users guide cohesion and friction table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 18 (Lunar regolith cohesion and angle of internal friction), 0-15 cm row, C (kPa) average
- benchmark: cohesion
label: Cohesion, 30-60 cm depth (average)
value: 3
unit: kPa
scope: material
conditions:
depth_range_cm: 30-60
range_printed: 2.40-3.80 kPa
basis: averaged reference data modified from Carrier et al. 1999, as printed in the users guide
method: Average printed in the users guide cohesion and friction table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 18 (Lunar regolith cohesion and angle of internal friction), 30-60 cm row, C (kPa) average
- benchmark: friction_angle
label: Angle of internal friction, 0-15 cm depth (average)
value: 42
unit: °
scope: material
conditions:
depth_range_cm: 0-15
range_printed: 41-43 degrees
basis: averaged reference data modified from Carrier et al. 1999, as printed in the users guide
method: Average printed in the users guide cohesion and friction table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 18 (Lunar regolith cohesion and angle of internal friction), 0-15 cm row, phi (degrees) average
- benchmark: friction_angle
label: Angle of internal friction, 30-60 cm depth (average)
value: 54
unit: °
scope: material
conditions:
depth_range_cm: 30-60
range_printed: 52-55 degrees
basis: averaged reference data modified from Carrier et al. 1999, as printed in the users guide
method: Average printed in the users guide cohesion and friction table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 18 (Lunar regolith cohesion and angle of internal friction), 30-60 cm row, phi (degrees) average
- benchmark: friction_angle
label: Angle of internal friction estimated from Apollo experiments
value: 30
value_high: 50
bound: range
unit: °
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range given as the Apollo experiments estimate; the authors say it did not allow for the increase of friction angle with depth
method: Range stated in a conference abstract, citing the Apollo estimate
status: ground
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, 'Friction Angle and Normal Stress' paragraph
- benchmark: modulus_of_subgrade_reaction
label: Modulus of subgrade reaction k, Apollo bootprint average
value: 920
unit: Pa/mm
scope: material
conditions:
basis: average over 776 Apollo bootprints, each treated as a plate-load test
stress: approximately 7,000 Pa from one astronaut standing on one foot
method: Average k from the bootprint analysis, as stated by the authors
status: ground
source: connolly2023
where: Introduction (Modeling Lunar Regolith as a Function of Depth), paragraph on bootprint statistics
- benchmark: bootprint_depth
label: Average bootprint depth from the Apollo bootprint analysis
value: 7.6
unit: mm
scope: material
conditions:
basis: calculated by the authors as stress over modulus, 7000 Pa divided by 920 Pa/mm
method: Calculated by the authors from the stress and k values they report
status: calculated
source: connolly2023
where: Introduction, bootprint paragraph (7000 Pa / 920 Pa/mm = 7.6 mm)
- benchmark: upper_layer_depth
label: Thickness of the loosely consolidated upper regolith layer
value: 10
value_high: 15
bound: range
unit: cm
scope: material
conditions:
basis: conceptual layer model stated by the authors; gardened by micrometeorite flux
method: Range stated in a conference abstract
status: ground
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, 'Modeling Lunar Regolith as a Function of Depth', first paragraph
- benchmark: amorphous_content
label: Amorphous (glass) content, Apollo 15 average
value: 38.6
unit: '%'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: average of Apollo 15 soil samples compiled from Taylor et al. 2019, as printed on the slide
sample: returned lunar soil
method: Average printed in the Apollo amorphous content table
status: ground
source: collins2022
where: Slide 18, table 'Apollo Amorphous Content Data', Apollo 15 row, Average (%)
- benchmark: amorphous_content
label: Amorphous (glass) content, Apollo 17 average
value: 31.1
unit: '%'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: average of Apollo 17 soil samples compiled from Taylor et al. 2019, as printed on the slide
sample: returned lunar soil
method: Average printed in the Apollo amorphous content table
status: ground
source: collins2022
where: Slide 18, table 'Apollo Amorphous Content Data', Apollo 17 row, Average (%)
- benchmark: modal_glass
label: Glass, modal content (low-Ti mare regional average)
value: 32.98
unit: wt%
scope: material
conditions:
region: Low-Ti mare
basis: averaged regional value from Apollo returned sample XRD by Taylor et al. 2019, as printed in the users guide
method: Averaged value printed in the users guide modal mineralogy table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 3 (Averaged regional lunar modal mineralogy), Glass row, Low-Ti Mare column
- benchmark: modal_plagioclase
label: Plagioclase feldspar, modal content (highlands regional average)
value: 59.05
unit: wt%
scope: material
conditions:
region: Highlands
basis: averaged regional value from Apollo returned sample XRD by Taylor et al. 2019, as printed in the users guide
method: Averaged value printed in the users guide modal mineralogy table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 3 (Averaged regional lunar modal mineralogy), Plagioclase Feldspar row, Highlands column
- benchmark: sio2
label: Silicon dioxide, highlands surface regional average
value: 45.62
unit: wt%
scope: material
conditions:
region: Highlands surface
basis: averaged regional oxide chemistry from Apollo returned sample studies, as printed in the users guide
method: Averaged value printed in the users guide bulk chemistry table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 6 (Averaged regional lunar surface oxide chemistry), SiO2 column, Highlands row
- benchmark: al2o3
label: Aluminium oxide, highlands surface regional average
value: 24.47
unit: wt%
scope: material
conditions:
region: Highlands surface
basis: averaged regional oxide chemistry from Apollo returned sample studies, as printed in the users guide
method: Averaged value printed in the users guide bulk chemistry table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 6 (Averaged regional lunar surface oxide chemistry), Al2O3 column, Highlands row
- benchmark: tio2
label: Titanium dioxide, high-Ti mare surface regional average
value: 7.48
unit: wt%
scope: material
conditions:
region: High-Ti mare surface
basis: averaged regional oxide chemistry from Apollo returned sample studies, as printed in the users guide
method: Averaged value printed in the users guide bulk chemistry table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 6 (Averaged regional lunar surface oxide chemistry), TiO2 column, High-Ti Mare row
- benchmark: median_particle_size_d50
label: Median particle size (Q50), low-Ti mare Apollo samples
value: 65.1
unit: µm
scope: material
conditions:
region: Low-Ti mare
basis: average Q50 of % passing grains from Apollo returned samples (Graf 1993), per the users guide; most published Apollo curves cover only the fraction under 1 cm
method: Average printed in the users guide particle size distribution table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 9 (Averaged regional percent particle passing), Q50 row, Low-Ti Mare column
- benchmark: median_particle_size_d50
label: Median particle size (Q50), highlands Apollo samples
value: 118.8
unit: µm
scope: material
conditions:
region: Highlands
basis: average Q50 of % passing grains from Apollo returned samples (Graf 1993), per the users guide; most published Apollo curves cover only the fraction under 1 cm
method: Average printed in the users guide particle size distribution table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 9 (Averaged regional percent particle passing), Q50 row, Highlands column
- benchmark: aspect_ratio
label: Particle aspect ratio, Apollo samples (bulk value)
value: 0.7
unit: '-'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: bulk value averaged over measured Apollo samples by Cannon and Walker 2021, as printed in the users guide
method: Bulk reference value printed in the users guide particle geometry table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 12 (Averaged AR and Root Form Factor values for Apollo samples), Aspect Ratio row
- benchmark: sqrt_form_factor
label: Root form factor, Apollo samples (bulk value)
value: 0.94
unit: '-'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: bulk value averaged over measured Apollo samples by Cannon and Walker 2021, as printed in the users guide
method: Bulk reference value printed in the users guide particle geometry table
status: ground
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 12 (Averaged AR and Root Form Factor values for Apollo samples), Root Form Factor row
- benchmark: agglutinate_content
label: Agglutinate content of lunar regolith, as summarised from previous studies
value: 15
value_high: 60
bound: range
unit: wt%
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range given by the authors for previous studies of lunar regolith; printed as percent by weight
note: a summary of earlier work, not one Apollo sample set
method: Range stated in an arXiv paper, citing earlier lunar regolith studies
status: ground
source: dotson-2024
where: Paragraph on the LHS-1-25A simulant in the simulant description (Section 2)
corrosion:
- environment: Lunar surface micrometeorite bombardment (space weathering of the top layer)
headline: The sources describe the top layer as gardened by micrometeorite impacts, but none gives a corrosion or degradation rate for lunar regolith.
effect: Connolly and Carrier describe the lunar surface as a 10-15 cm upper layer of loosely consolidated regolith gardened by micrometeorite flux. The Wikipedia lunar soil article says glass and agglutinate particles form at the surface through impact melting and micrometeorite welding. No source read gives a rate of change or a measured degradation for this layer.
rating: unknown
conditions:
basis: descriptive statements of formation; no measured degradation test in the sources read
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, 'Modeling Lunar Regolith as a Function of Depth', first paragraph
risks:
hazards:
- text: No GHS classification and no safety data sheet for returned Apollo lunar regolith was found in the sources read. The users guide applies its silica and dust hazard statements to lunar simulants, not to returned Apollo soil.
ghs: []
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Section 5.5 (Potential Hazards from Simulants)
- text: The users guide says that chronic inhalation of respirable (<10 microns) particulates can lead to pneumoconiosis, including silicosis, which is usually linked to years of exposure.
ghs: []
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Section 5.5.2 (Illness)
- text: NASA sets an exposure limit of 0.025 mg/m3 (25 µg/m3) TWA for respirable crystalline silica, which is also the OSHA action level, according to the users guide.
ghs: []
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Section 5.6 (Exposure Hazards, Crystalline Silica, PNOR, Control)
- text: Table 25 of the users guide lists silica analyses for simulants and feedstocks but no returned Apollo sample row, so no crystalline silica value for Apollo lunar soil was found.
ghs: []
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 25 (Summary of total percent crystalline and respirable silica)
failure_risks:
- mode: Single surface strength used for deeper design
trigger: Using a surface value for cohesion or friction angle in a design that reaches below 15 cm
consequence: Cohesion averages 0.52 kPa at 0-15 cm and 3.0 kPa at 30-60 cm, and friction angle averages 42 degrees at 0-15 cm and 54 degrees at 30-60 cm (Carrier et al. 1999 values in the users guide).
severity: moderate
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Table 18 (Lunar regolith cohesion and angle of internal friction values)
- mode: Lighter surface soil underestimated for landing loads
trigger: Landing footpad or foundation design that uses surface density for the full depth
consequence: Bulk density is about 1.30 g/cm3 at the surface and rises to 1.92 g/cm3 below 100 cm, so a surface density underestimates deeper bearing soil (Connolly and Carrier).
severity: low
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, 'Modeling Lunar Regolith as a Function of Depth', first paragraph
side_effects:
- text: The users guide notes that handling large crystalline silica particles (over 100 microns) can generate respirable particles (under 10 microns).
affects: Workers and test areas
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Section 5.4 (Crystalline Silica Content in Simulants)
handling:
- text: For loose simulants, the users guide advises frequent cleaning of work areas by wet wiping or HEPA vacuuming. No Apollo-specific handling rule was found.
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Section 5.5.1 (Injury, slips, trips and falls)
mitigations:
- text: The users guide says exposure monitoring is the only method to determine occupational exposure to crystalline silica.
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Section 5.8 (Workplace Monitoring)
uses:
- application: structures
device: Footpad and foundation design (Winkler soil model)
example: Connolly and Carrier say the Winkler model is used on the Moon to analyze footpad-soil interaction during landing and the deployment of scientific instruments, with Apollo bootprint and Lunokhod data as inputs.
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, Introduction paragraph on the Winkler model
- application: rovers-and-surface-systems
device: Rover wheel-soil interaction
example: The same abstract says the Winkler model is also used on the Moon to analyze wheel-soil interaction of a roving vehicle.
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, Introduction paragraph on the Winkler model
- application: in-space-manufacturing
device: Geopolymer concrete from regolith (research)
example: The Collins et al. slides give the goal as using as much in-situ lunar resource as possible, with regolith in the as-is condition making up most of the mass. The same slides say lunar regolith simulants are the only way to progress geopolymer lunar concrete work.
source: collins2022
where: Slide 15 (Supporting reasons for geopolymer lunar concrete) and slide 16
supply:
- subject: Returned Apollo lunar samples
abundance: 362 kg (842 lb.) of lunar rock and soil collected by twelve Apollo astronauts, per the users guide. The 2019 Ogunyinka dissertation gives approximately 382 kg of Moon rock returned by Apollo. Both are recorded side by side.
producers: []
origin: 'Six Apollo landings from July 1969 to December 1972: five in the mare and one in the highlands, all in the equatorial region of the near side (users guide). The users guide also gives 3,666 grams from Chang''e-5 and Chang''e-6 and 300 grams from three Luna missions. The Wikipedia lunar soil article says Chang''e 5 returned about 2 kilograms.'
status: Held and curated by NASA at the Johnson Space Center. NASA's Lunar Sample Compendium lists the samples by mission, for example 'These samples were collected during the Apollo 11 mission.'
source: nasa-guide-2024
where: Section 1.0 (Introduction)
- subject: In-situ lunar regolith
abundance: No tonnage or resource estimate for lunar regolith was found in the sources read.
producers: []
origin: The lunar surface is a 10-15 cm upper layer of loosely consolidated regolith over a dense, consolidated lower layer (Connolly and Carrier).
status: Not a commercial product. No producers apply.
source: connolly2023
where: Abstract, 'Modeling Lunar Regolith as a Function of Depth', first paragraph
media: []
documents:
- title: NASA/TM-20240011783, Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide, Revision A
type: report
url: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20240011783/downloads/Lunar_Regolith_Simulant_Users_Guide_Rev_A_28OCT.pdf
year: 2024
- title: Connolly and Carrier, Updating lunar subsurface geotechnical properties based upon nonlinear Winkler modeling of Apollo and Lunokhod measurements (LPSC 2023 abstract)
type: paper
url: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20220018853/downloads/LPSC%202023%20Abstract_Connolly_Carrier_v2.pdf
year: 2023
- title: Collins et al., Geopolymer Concrete, a greener alternative on Earth and a feasible material for the Moon (Earth Day 2022 slides, NTRS 20220005876)
type: report
url: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20220005876/downloads/Earth%20Day%202022%20Geopolymer%20Concrete.pdf
year: 2022
- title: Ogunyinka 2019, Investigation of Material Properties of Sintered Black Point-1 Lunar Regolith Simulant (UCT MPhil dissertation)
type: report
url: https://open.uct.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/ead778a3-7849-4fc1-9289-f09448b8c30b/content
year: 2019
- title: Dotson et al. 2024, Cohesion and Shear Strength of Compacted Lunar and Martian Regolith Simulants (arXiv 2403.11029)
type: paper
url: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.11029
year: 2024
- title: NASA Lunar Sample Compendium (Johnson Space Center Astromaterials Curation)
type: database
url: https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/lsc
gaps:
- 'Crystalline silica for returned Apollo lunar soil was not found: the users guide silica summary (Table 25) has no Apollo row, so no Apollo silica value is recorded.'
- No hazard test, GHS classification or safety data sheet for Apollo lunar regolith was found. The hazard entries use the users guide statements written for simulants and say so.
- Grain density and porosity of Apollo regolith are not in any source read.
- Oxide values for Apollo missions in the Collins et al. slides (SiO2 and Al2O3 by mission, Slide 19) are printed without a unit, so they are not recorded.
- The Collins et al. slide gives the lunar atmospheric pressure as a power of ten (exponent form), so it is not recorded. Connolly and Carrier's nonlinear exponent (n = 1.86) and their k value in units with a superscript exponent are also not recorded for the same reason.
- Connolly and Carrier's Figure 1 shear-strength curve and their cohesion statement ('quickly increases beyond 3 kPa at depths below 50 cm') are described only qualitatively in the abstract, so only the users guide Table 18 values are recorded for cohesion.
- The original Carrier et al. 1999 and Connolly and Carrier 2022 engineer's guide were not opened; Table 18 values are taken as printed in the users guide, which says they were modified from Carrier et al. 1999.
- 'Sample totals conflict: 362 kg (users guide) against approximately 382 kg (Ogunyinka 2019). Both are recorded, and neither is preferred.'
- Apollo mission density values in Table 15 are averages of reference rows and do not give a grain density or the measurement method for each row.
- Corrosion and degradation ratings are not given by any source read, so the single corrosion entry is recorded as unknown.
- Lunar-day and lunar-night tags rest on the NSSDC Moon fact sheet diurnal range (95 K to 390 K at the equator); no source read gives a regolith test under those conditions.
- Vacuum, radiation and thermal-cycling behaviour of regolith under test was not found in any source read.
- Critical-mineral lists (USGS, EU) were not checked for regolith; no producer shares apply.
- Wikipedia is used only for composition and history (the seven-element composition and the Chang'e 5 return mass) as the profile standard requires.
- 'Property names not in spores/property-canon.yaml: cohesion, friction_angle, modulus_of_subgrade_reaction, bootprint_depth, upper_layer_depth, amorphous_content, modal_glass, modal_plagioclase, sio2, al2o3, tio2, agglutinate_content, aspect_ratio and sqrt_form_factor. Names follow the BP-1 profile where one exists.'
sources:
nasa-guide-2024:
title: Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide, Revision A
id: NASA/TM-20240011783, effective 10/24/2024 (NTRS 20240011783)
url: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20240011783/downloads/Lunar_Regolith_Simulant_Users_Guide_Rev_A_28OCT.pdf
year: 2024
kind: report
license: NASA public document
connolly2023:
title: Updating lunar subsurface geotechnical properties based upon nonlinear Winkler modeling of Apollo and Lunokhod measurements (LPSC 2023 abstract)
id: J.F. Connolly and W.D. Carrier, NTRS 20220018853
url: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20220018853/downloads/LPSC%202023%20Abstract_Connolly_Carrier_v2.pdf
year: 2023
kind: paper
license: NASA public document; licence not stated in the copy read
collins2022:
title: Geopolymer Concrete, a greener alternative on Earth and a feasible material for the Moon (Earth Day 2022 presentation)
id: P.J. Collins, A. Radlinska, J. Edmunson, M. Fiske, L. Strutzenberg, NTRS 20220005876
url: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20220005876/downloads/Earth%20Day%202022%20Geopolymer%20Concrete.pdf
year: 2022
kind: report
license: NASA public document; licence not stated in the copy read
wiki-lunar-soil:
title: Lunar soil (Wikipedia)
id: Wikipedia, English edition
url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_soil
kind: web
license: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Wikipedia); used for composition and history only
nasa-moonfact:
title: Moon fact sheet (NASA NSSDC)
id: NSSDC planetary fact sheet
url: https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/moonfact.html
kind: web
license: NASA public information
uct-ogunyinka-2019:
title: Investigation of Material Properties of Sintered Black Point-1 Lunar Regolith Simulant (MPhil dissertation, Adebayo Olutumbi Ogunyinka)
id: University of Cape Town, SpaceLab, SL19-010M, September 2019
url: https://open.uct.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/ead778a3-7849-4fc1-9289-f09448b8c30b/content
year: 2019
kind: report
license: University of Cape Town thesis; the title page limits use to private study or non-commercial research
dotson-2024:
title: Cohesion and Shear Strength of Compacted Lunar and Martian Regolith Simulants
id: arXiv 2403.11029; B. Dotson et al. (University of Central Florida)
url: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.11029
year: 2024
kind: paper
license: arXiv preprint; licence not stated in the copy read
lunar-sample-compendium:
title: Lunar Sample Compendium (NASA Johnson Space Center, Astromaterials Curation)
id: NASA JSC Lunar Sample Compendium
url: https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/lsc
kind: database
license: NASA public information
license: CC-BY-4.0
updated: '2026-11-01'
review:
status: draft
method: assistant
checked_values: 25
unreachable: 0
caveats: 4
note: 'Written by an AI assistant on 2026-11-01. Documents opened: the NASA users guide NASA/TM-20240011783 (PDF text, Tables 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 and 25, Sections 1.0 and 5.4 to 5.8), the Connolly and Carrier LPSC 2023 abstract (PDF text), the Collins et al. Earth Day 2022 slides (PDF text), the Wikipedia lunar soil article (composition and history only), the NSSDC Moon fact sheet, the Ogunyinka 2019 dissertation (PDF text, lunar context only), the Dotson et al. 2024 arXiv paper (PDF text) and the NASA Lunar Sample Compendium page. The WebSearch budget for this run was exhausted, so no further search was made. Not opened: Carrier et al. 1991 and 1999, Connolly and Carrier 2022 engineer''s guide, Slyuta 2014 review, Heiken et al. 1991 Lunar Sourcebook.'
story:
recipe:
line: Apollo lunar regolith is not a compound. It is a mixture of crushed rock and mineral fragments, plus glass formed by micrometeorite impacts, and its mineral mix depends on the region. The users guide gives regional averages from Apollo returned samples. Wikipedia reports that seven elements make up 98-99% of the composition of lunar rocks and soil.
parts:
- name: Plagioclase feldspar
symbol: '-'
share: 59.05 wt% in the highlands (users guide Table 3)
role: The main mineral in highland soil; the rock-forming feldspar of the Moon's crust.
- name: Pyroxene
symbol: '-'
share: the largest mafic share in mare soil (users guide Table 3)
role: The main mafic mineral in mare soil.
- name: Olivine
symbol: '-'
share: a minor share in every region (users guide Table 3)
role: A minor mineral that varies with region.
- name: Ilmenite
symbol: '-'
share: a major share in high-Ti mare, a minor share in the highlands (users guide Table 3)
role: An iron-titanium oxide; its share is what separates high-Ti mare soil from highland soil.
- name: Glass
symbol: '-'
share: 32.98 wt% in low-Ti mare (users guide Table 3)
role: Formed by micrometeorite impacts and welded to other fragments (Wikipedia lunar soil).
risk_groups:
- title: For people
verdict: Dust is the main concern; no hazard test found
lead: No GHS classification or safety data sheet for returned Apollo regolith was found. The users guide gives silica and dust hazard statements written for simulants.
points:
- label: Crystalline silica
line: No Apollo sample is in the users guide silica summary, so the crystalline silica content of returned Apollo soil is unknown from the sources read.
- label: Respirable dust
line: The users guide says chronic inhalation of respirable (under 10 microns) particulates can lead to pneumoconiosis, including silicosis.
- label: Exposure limit
line: NASA sets 0.025 mg/m3 (25 µg/m3) as an 8-hour TWA limit for respirable crystalline silica, which is also the OSHA action level (users guide, Section 5.6).
- title: For a rover or test bed
lead: Strength and density change with depth, so a single surface value can mislead a design.
points:
- label: Depth
line: Cohesion averages 0.52 kPa at 0-15 cm and 3.0 kPa at 30-60 cm (users guide Table 18).
- label: Density
line: Bulk density is about 1.30 g/cm3 at the surface and 1.92 g/cm3 below 100 cm (Connolly and Carrier).
- title: Handling and storage
points:
- label: Cleaning
line: For loose simulants, the users guide advises wet wiping or HEPA vacuuming of work areas. No Apollo-specific instruction was found.
- label: Monitoring
line: The users guide says exposure monitoring is the only method to determine occupational exposure to crystalline silica.
why: Apollo lunar regolith is the reference for how lunar soil behaves. Twelve Apollo astronauts collected 362 kg of rock and soil from six landing sites, and the returned samples are the ground truth that simulants are compared with. Connolly and Carrier also used Apollo bootprints and Lunokhod penetrometer tests to estimate how density and strength grow with depth, which matters for landers, footpads and rovers. The users guide notes that most Apollo grain-size curves cover only the fraction under 1 cm.
uses:
- where: Landing and footpad design
line: Connolly and Carrier use the Winkler soil model on the Moon to analyze footpad-soil interaction during landing, with Apollo bootprint and Lunokhod data as inputs.
- where: Rover wheel-soil interaction
line: The same abstract applies the Winkler model to wheel-soil interaction of a roving vehicle.
- where: Geopolymer concrete research
line: Collins et al. describe regolith in its as-is condition as the bulk of the mass for geopolymer lunar concrete, but say simulants are the only way to progress that work.
can_do:
- label: Show how density grows with depth
line: 1.30 g/cm3 at the surface and 1.92 g/cm3 below a depth of 100 cm (Connolly and Carrier, LPSC 2023).
- label: Give a depth-dependent strength range
line: cohesion 0.52 kPa at 0-15 cm and 3.0 kPa at 30-60 cm, with friction angle 42 degrees and 54 degrees over the same depths (users guide Table 18).
- label: Compare regional mineral content
line: plagioclase feldspar is 59.05 wt% in the highlands, while glass is 32.98 wt% in low-Ti mare (users guide Table 3).
- label: Give the bulk shape of Apollo grains
line: aspect ratio 0.7 and root form factor 0.94 (Cannon and Walker 2021, as printed in the users guide Table 12).
compare: Apollo lunar regolith is the reference that simulants are built to match, not a simulant itself. Users guide Table 15 gives mission density ranges from 1.36 to 2.29 g/cm3 for Apollo 15 and Apollo 17 rows, which shows the spread between sites. The table compares density, cohesion and friction angle with the same benchmarks used for the simulant profiles in this collection.
compare_rows:
- label: Density
benchmark: density
- label: Cohesion
benchmark: cohesion
- label: Friction angle
benchmark: friction_angle
handling:
- Use a dust mask or respirator where dust forms, following the users guide controls for simulants until an Apollo-specific hazard analysis is available.
- Monitor exposure to crystalline silica, because the users guide says monitoring is the only method to measure occupational exposure.
- Do not use one surface value for strength or density in a design that reaches below 15 cm.
good_for:
- Reference values for lunar surface soil in landing, excavation and rover design (Connolly and Carrier).
- Setting the target properties that lunar simulants should match, using averaged Apollo data (users guide).
watch_out:
- Density, strength and composition change with depth and region, so one value does not describe all lunar soil.
- Crystalline silica of returned Apollo soil is not measured in any source read.
- 'The mass returned by Apollo differs by source: 362 kg in the users guide against approximately 382 kg in the 2019 dissertation.'
verdict: Apollo lunar regolith is the reference for lunar soil properties, but the sources read give depth- and region-specific averages rather than one value. No source read tests it under lunar vacuum or thermal cycling.
References
Every number above carries a reference number. Click one to see the source and where in it the value comes from.
| # | Source | Type | Year | Used for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lunar Regolith Simulant User's Guide, Revision A | report | 2024 | 26 values | |
| Updating lunar subsurface geotechnical properties based upon nonlinear Winkler modeling of Apollo and Lunokhod measurements (LPSC 2023 abstract) | paper | 2023 | 11 values | |
| Geopolymer Concrete, a greener alternative on Earth and a feasible material for the Moon (Earth Day 2022 presentation) | report | 2022 | 3 values | |
| Lunar soil (Wikipedia) | web | 0 values | ||
| Moon fact sheet (NASA NSSDC) | web | 0 values | ||
| Investigation of Material Properties of Sintered Black Point-1 Lunar Regolith Simulant (MPhil dissertation, Adebayo Olutumbi Ogunyinka) | report | 2019 | 0 values | |
| Cohesion and Shear Strength of Compacted Lunar and Martian Regolith Simulants | paper | 2024 | 1 value | |
| Lunar Sample Compendium (NASA Johnson Space Center, Astromaterials Curation) | database | 0 values |
Updated