First Exotic Space Thruster Test Ends in Explosion

KentuckyFC writes "A NASA-funded test of an entirely new way to control orbiting satellites has ended with the prototype arcing dangerously and parts of the machine exploding. The new propulsion system is based on the Lorentz force: that a charged particle moving through a magnetic field experiences a force perpendicular to both its velocity and the field. So the plan is to ensure that a satellite passing though the Earth's magnetic field is electrically charged so as to generate a force that can be used to steer the spacecraft. The advantage of the idea is that it requires no propellant, which is a big deal since most satellites' lifespans are limited by the amount of fuel they can carry. But the first ground-based tests haven't gone entirely to plan."

Comments

Doesn't seem like a significant setback.

[Pendersempai]

Here is the story, based on my admittedly non-expert reading: To use the (very exciting) Lorentz steering technology, the sattelite has to have an electric charge. The method they used to obtain the charge is to apply a voltage to a radioactive substance and then allow solar wind to carry away the positive charge, leaving the sattelite negatively charged. The problem seemed to be that this process caused sparks to arc across the sattelite, which in turn damaged electronics and dislodged soldering.

I'm not sure why this is a big deal. Couldn't they just use a different kind of solder, or at least insulate vulnerable electronics from the charge?

Re:Doesn't seem like a significant setback.

[v1]

That's what I was working on figuring out, from the wording of the article ("explosion") it made it sound like a big deal, like when a rocket launch goes bad. (see various youtube links in this thread)

But when I got to reading, they use the word "explosion" for solder. Solder is not big. It's not like a fuel tank went up - this is a little bit of electronics. That sounds like a smaller explosion than you get with your average match when you strike it.

That's like talking about buildings and saying there was a "collapse", and if you RTFA close enough you find what they're actually referring to is the water glass on the table in the lounge tipped over.

Honest perhaps, but definitely deceptive.

dependant on earth's magnetic field?

[lobiusmoop]

Will this screw up when the earths field begins fluctuating when poles being going into reversal again?

Mind you, when this begins, I suspect the last thing we would be worried about if/when this comes would be the odd satellite crashing back to earth.

Re:Explosions are an indicator of work

[iamlucky13]

Since I basically just put words into people's mouths for a laugh, I figured I'd google up some actual quotes by these people related to their work.

• MIT coworker on Percy Spencer: "Like Edison, he will cut and fit and try and throwaway and try again."
• James Watt on one of his designs: "It is very defective."
• Alfred Nobel: "If I have a thousand ideas and only one turns out to be good, I am satisfied."
• Vladimir Titov after his Soyuz rocket exploded beneath him: "We were swearing."
• Werner von Braun (memory from childhood): "Selecting half a dozen of the biggest skyrockets I could find, I strapped them to the wagon. It performed beyond my wildest dreams. The wagon careened crazily about, trailing a tail of fire like a comet. When the rockets burned out, ending their sparkling performance with a magnificent thunderclap, the wagon rolled majestically to a halt. The police who arrived late for the beginning of my experiment, but in time for the grand finale, were unappreciative."
• Yang Liwei: "I did not see the Great Wall from space."
• Yet-Ming Chiang (MIT chemist): "The unstable materials release oxygen, oxidizing other materials in the battery, which in turn produces more heat. The cycle continues in a process called "thermal runaway," which in some cases can lead to a violent explosion."
• J. Robert Oppenheimer: "It worked."