Apollo lunar heat flow experiment revisited: A critical reassessment of the in situ thermal conductivity determination

[1] Lunar heat flow was determined in situ during the Apollo 15 and 17 missions, but some uncertainty is connected to the value of the regolith's thermal conductivity, which enters as a linear factor into the heat flow calculation. Different approaches to determine the conductivity yielded discordant results, which led to a downward correction of the obtained heat flow values by 30%–50% subsequent to the publication of the first results. We have reinvestigated likely causes for the observed discrepancies and find that neither poor coupling between the probe and regolith nor axial heat loss can explain the obtained results. Rather, regolith compaction and compression likely caused a local increase of the regolith's thermal conductivity by a factor of 2–3 in a region which extends at least 2–5 cm from the borehole wall. We conclude that the corrected lunar heat flow values, which are based on thermal diffusivity estimates sampling a large portion of undisturbed regolith, represent robust results. Future in situ measurements of regolith thermal conductivity using active heating methods should take care to both minimize regolith disturbance during probe emplacement and maximize heating time to obtain reliable results. We find that for the Apollo measurements, heating times should have exceeded at least 100 h, and ideally 200 h.

[1]  Stephen J. Keihm,et al.  The Apollo 15 lunar heat-flow measurement , 1972 .

[2]  L. Hood,et al.  Further efforts to limit lunar internal temperatures from electrical conductivity determinations , 1982 .

[3]  A. Hagermann,et al.  Lost Apollo Heat Flow Data Suggest a Different Lunar Bulk Composition , 2007 .

[4]  K. Rasmussen,et al.  Megaregolith insulation, internal temperatures, and bulk uranium content of the moon , 1987 .

[5]  R. A. Robie,et al.  Specific heats of lunar soils, basalt, and breccias from the Apollo 14, 15, and 16 landing sites, between 90 and 350°K , 1973 .

[6]  K. Lambeck,et al.  On Constraining Lunar Mantle Temperatures from Gravity Data , 1980 .

[7]  C. Cremers.  Thermophysical properties of Apollo 12 fines , 1973 .

[8]  Axel Hagermann,et al.  Ejecta deposit thickness, heat flow, and a critical ambiguity on the Moon , 2006 .

[9]  G. Kargl,et al.  Determination of the effective thermal conductivity of granular materials under varying pressure conditions , 2008 .

[10]  G. Beardsmore.  Crustal heat flow , 2001 .

[11]  W. D. Carrier,et al.  The relative density of lunar soil , 1973 .

[12]  S. Keihm,et al.  The Revised Lunar Heat Flow Values , 1976 .

[13]  W. D. Carrier.  Apollo drill core depth relationships , 1974 .

[14]  Paul H. Warren,et al.  Megaregolith thickness, heat flow, and the bulk composition of the Moon , 1985, Nature.

[15]  J. Vaisnys,et al.  Contact thermal conductivity in lunar aggregates. , 1973 .

[16]  K. Horai.  The effect of interstitial gaseous pressure on the thermal conductivity of a simulated Apollo 12 lunar soil sample , 1981 .

[17]  M. G. Langseth,et al.  Heat Flow Experiment , 1972 .

[18]  A. Hagermann,et al.  The Long Term Temperature Variation in the Lunar Subsurface , 2008 .

[19]  Stephen J. Keihm,et al.  Lunar Microwave Brightness Temperature Observations Reevaluated in the Light of Apollo Program Findings , 1975 .

[20]  Philip R. Christensen,et al.  Thermal conductivity measurements of particulate materials 1. A review , 1997 .

[21]  W. Sabuga,et al.  Transient Hot Wire (THW) Method: Uncertainty Assessment , 2000 .