4.4 Article

Challenges Analyzing Gypsum on Mars by Raman Spectroscopy

期刊

ASTROBIOLOGY
卷 15, 期 9, 页码 761-769

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/ast.2015.1334

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Raman spectroscopy can provide chemical information about organic and inorganic substances quickly and nondestructively with little to no sample preparation, thus making it an ideal instrument for Mars rover missions. The ESA ExoMars planetary mission scheduled for launch in 2018 will contain a miniaturized Raman spectrometer (RLS) as part of the Pasteur payload operating with a continuous wave (CW) laser emitting at 532nm. In addition, NASA is independently developing two miniaturized Raman spectrometers for the upcoming Mars 2020 rover mission, one of which is a remote (stand-off) Raman spectrometer that uses a pulse-gated 532nm excitation system (SuperCam). The other is an in situ Raman spectrometer that employs a CW excitation laser emitting at 248.6nm (SHERLOC). Recently, it has been shown with analyses by Curiosity that Gale Crater contains significantly elevated concentrations of transition metals such as Cr and Mn. Significantly, these transition metals are known to undergo fluorescence emission in the visible portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Consequently, samples containing these metals could be problematic for the successful acquisition of fluorescence-free Raman spectra when using a CW 532nm excitation source. Here, we investigate one analog environment, with a similar mineralogy and sedimentology to that observed in martian environments, as well as elevated Cr contents, to ascertain the best excitation wavelength to successfully collect fluorescence-free spectra from Mars-like samples. Our results clearly show that CW near-infrared laser excitation emitting at 785nm is better suited to the collection of fluorescence-free Raman spectra than would be a CW laser emitting at 532nm. Key Words: Raman spectroscopyGypsumChromiumManganeseIron-oxide dustMars. Astrobiology 15, 761-769.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据