Slashdot Mirror
NASA Awards Contract To Bigelow Aerospace For Inflatable ISS Module
cylonlover writes "NASA has announced that it has awarded a $17.8 million contract to Bigelow Aerospace to provide the International Space Station with an inflatable module. Details of the award will be discussed by NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver and Bigelow Aerospace President Robert Bigelow at a press conference on January 16 at the Bigelow Aerospace facilities in North Las Vegas. However, based on previous talks, it's likely that the module in question could be the Bigelow Expandable Activity Module (BEAM)."
Manwhore Enterprises?
what could possibly go wrong
First post for Jesus
Keepin it real for Jesus
Bouncy Castle INNNNN SPAAACE!
Bigelow got their tech from NASA, because NASA didn't want to pay to move it forward. So, Bigelow makes it usable, NASA buys it back.
So where do they get the air to inflate it?
they'd better have a puncture repair kit too
You mean Manwhore Enterprise?
This is 17 million for the study. More importantly, beam will NOT be 65 tonnes. Heck, we have nothing that can take it up since the days of the saturn V. It is a SMALL closet that will weigh under 7 tonnes.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Won't be more than 15 PSI. Which isn't that high - not even as high as a tire (35-40 PSI)
Mm, but a tyre has 15 PSI (1 standard atmosphere) on the outside to counteract the 35 PSI on the inside.
Tire pressure measurements are relative, not absolute. So "35-40" PSI tire pressure means 35-40 PSI higher than atmospheric pressure
...Torg's team will be arriving shortly. Suggest you evacuate using the DFA.
Ok so it might be viable, but somehow i expect them having tons of trouble convince astronauts thats its safe...
There is no inflatable product on the market today that does not eventually develop a leak or burst. Air mattresses, tires, dolls...
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
This is a good step forward, and something that has been a long-time in coming. Good job Bigelow!
Good engineering really should win out, and this stuff really does seem to be just better.
Make the balloon a 2-layered affair with a few feet of air space. Then you fill that space with thousands of small floating balloons whose interiors are slightly sticky. Meteorite hits. Small balloons immediately travel to where the air is leaking out, burst, and plug the hole with a bunch of goopy rubber until someone (or some robot) can go outside once a month or so and put on maintenance patches.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
I believe it was the White Star Line.
Bigelow didn't just invent this stuff out of the blue. This technology was originally developed by NASA and was called Transhab. It was tested extensively and has considerable amount of redundancy in the many layers incorporated into the design. In almost all respects it outperforms the rigid modules currently used in the ISS. The only reason that this isn't being used already is because funding for the project was cut and NASA sold the technology to Bigelow. In a way it was a fortuitous thing because now they can get the technology they already wanted, and trust, without the cost of continued development. It has been commoditized (as much as space stuff can be a commodity.)
They did not have lots of layers.
They had many compartments, which do not address a large continuous tear.
Good effort though.
The design is essentially the recycling of old NASA concepts:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransHab
The multi-layer design is highly effectively again MMOD impacts, better than most of the shielding currently on ISS.
The way I heard it, the TransHab (inflatable module) had some really serious enemies in Congress. That is, enemies to the tune that the NASA budget was written to explicitly forbid any money for TransHab development. So NASA sold what they had to Bigelow, since they were legally forbidden to do anything else with it. (Just checked Wikipedia, and there is at least some level of confirmation for this.)
Bigelow has 2 TransHab-based test articles in orbit. Last I heard, they were planning their own "Space Hotel." I wonder what they'd charge for "Hundred Mile High" certificates, apart from the launch and on-orbit fees.
Interestingly, everything I'd see on TransHab had the floors perpendicular to the axis. The photos in TFA have the floors parallel to the axis.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
On earth 6 foot ceiling is not all that much different than a 20-foot ceiling, because you arent going to use much of that space above 6 feet. But in micro-gravity you any of the six walls becomes a floor, thereby allowing you to use the entire volume. Less claustophobic in that case.
Given how cheaply most gauges are built, I'd simply say 'put the gauge markings assuming that the outside is at 14.7 PSI, sea level'.
But them being relative makes sense. You'd fill your vehicle up in Denver(mile high city) with a little less absolute pressure than in Florida, but that wouldn't matter much as there would be less air pressure trying to collapse them.
Also, if a rubber tire can withstand 90+ PSI*, I have no problems believing that an advanced hybrid using fibers tougher than kevlar can hold 14.7 PSI without problem.
*Going by explode point, not daily use, though I know of rubber tires
I don't read AC A human right
It won't be like Bigelow BA 2100, they're looking for an ISS module, not another ISS. Other sources say the module will only be about 1 ton.
I imagine there are some astronauts down the pipeline jumping for joy at the possibility. Skylab was the only station with a decent amount of internal space, and that burnt up 30 years ago. While I doubt this will be one of the larger Bigelow components (BA 2100, 4 DECKS! @65,000 kg) I bet it'll add a significant amount of space to the station. Hopefully they don't have any trouble funding a launch vehicle for it, ~$18 million is chump change for increasing the stations livable area by at least 35%.
Remember, in space, no one can hear you leak.
I was looking around, it turns out that the inflatables produced by Bigelow have a 15 cm thick skin, and while I'm not finding any source, I seem to remember them inflating one up to 50+ PSI on the ground as part of some test and not having a problem.
I don't read AC A human right
You're right, total pressure depends on the surface area, but when it comes to containing gas pressure, size matters less than you think.
You could make an aircraft that could hold the pressure of a scuba tank; but it'd be too heavy. A scuba tank is a LOT heavier for the surface area than a plane, and a plane needs to withstand many different stresses than the tank.
If you're making a tank, small or large the gauge of steel needed for the pressure remains about the same for the given pressure. Larger tanks will need more support to withstand the stress of gravity - which isn't perfectly proportional, but that's not a problem in space.
I don't read AC A human right
So to all you Obama haters, let it be known, here is yet another example of how Obama gets things done cheap and well.
Obama is the most fiscally responsible president we've had in decades.
Too bad he is paired up with the worst Congress in our country's history.
(at least the House is).
These people ride rockets tinto orbit at 17,000 mph and come back in something which burns itself up to save their skins, all dependent on incredibly precise control, and you think they would waste any brain power to worry about the module popping from decompression?
Astronauts are probably the most anal-lytic of all adventurers, calculating everything to a fare-thee-well, practicing their missions for years in swim tanks to get every last detail down pat. The last thing they are going to do is become emotional about such an easily proved design.
Infuriate left and right
The situation is not quite as bad as you present, because we don't actualy care about the axial loads, we care about the skin stresses. Yes, pressure increases linearly with the amount of surface area (i.e. with the square of linear dimension), but the stress we care about is distributed along the skin cross section, which is directly proportional to the linear dimension.
For example lets think of "ring" of wall that makes up the middle of a cylindrical chamber. Air pressure is exerting a radial force outwards in all directions, while the tensile strength keeping the ring from stretching/tearing is oriented circumferentially, with the material fibers acting like thousands of tiny rope rings. Double the diameter of the ring and you double the surface area, the pressure, and the the force exerted by each of those tiny ropes to keep it from stretching. On the other hand double the length, and there's no net change. You still have twice the force being contained, but now you also have twice as many ropes, so the force on each one is unchanged. As for the axial forces, those change with the square of diameter, but not at all with length. And the number of lengthwise "ropes" also increases linearly with diameter, so each doubling of diameter again only doubles the stress on each strand.
Obviously there's still an upper limit, but the picture is much rosier:
22ft diameter = stress of ~34,000 lbs/foot
41 ft diameter = stress of ~65,000 lbs/foot
There's also a really simple solution: every time you double the diameter, (which doubles the stress) also double the thickness of the fabric, (which doubles the number of fibers carrying that stress). When you consider that working volume is proportional to diameter cubed, and amount of fabric is proportional to surface area (diameter squared) times a thickness that increases linearly with diameter, what you really end up with is that the amount of material scales linearly with enclosed volume, not such a bad thing at all.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qZX2yI39A8
no joke.
In fact, this might destroy ASI's work on the cans. It always drove me up a wall that we removed competition on the module constructions. BUT, each one of those cans cost something like 200 million on up.
OTOH, if is 17 million for this small unit, it will be a major paradigm shift. The reason is that BEAM was SUPPOSED to include CBM or LIDS on each side. If they can do all of this for 17 million and all that is needed is to extend the metal core, and increase the size of the outer fabric, well, that means that a BA 330 can be done for under 50 million. Easy.
It also means that for less money than what ASI charge just for manufacturing their cans, BA and SpaceX can put a module that is 3-6x larger in volume. That really is incredible.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
They've been posting the same job openings for designers, engineers and model makers for the past 5 years.
Are they finally gonna hire people?