Slashdot Mirror


EPFL's CleanSpace One Satellite Will "Eat" Space Junk

Zothecula writes: Working with Geneva's University of Applied Science and Signal Processing 5 Laboratory, Swiss research institute EPFL has announced details of a plan to capture its tiny SwissCube satellites by using a new spacecraft outfitted with a conical net. Called "CleanSpace One" the team hopes that their "Pac-Man" solution will capture the old satellite. Gizmag reports: "...SwissCube's spinning action will make it more difficult to image, as its surfaces will alternately be brilliantly sunlit or hidden in shadow. That's why CleanSpace One's computer vision system will be running algorithms that account for variables such as the angle of the sun, the dimensions of the target, the speed at which that target is moving, and the rate at which CleanSpace One itself is spinning. High dynamic range cameras will also allow it to simultaneously expose for both bright and dark surfaces."

10 of 53 comments (clear)

  1. $commentSubject by Falos · · Score: 2

    I always figured the hard part was detecting/locating debris, more than bumping it towards reentry or escape velocity.

    I also always figured Planetes was going to be unmanned machines in practice.

  2. Red Dwarf Lives!!!! by gazelam · · Score: 2

    /obligatory

  3. I have some doubt about this by Eloking · · Score: 2

    Basically, this satellite need to joint the orbit and velocity of it's target. It seem a lot of energy to remove "one" debris. If something need to be done, wouldn't a freaking big net or something be better?

    --
    Elok
    1. Re:I have some doubt about this by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      Those pieces will have less energy though, due to some of it being absorbed in the impact.
      Less energy means lower orbit, which if they're already in LEO as most of these cubesats are, a quicker decent time until they burn up in the atmosphere.

  4. Re:Very needed by bobbied · · Score: 2

    This has been a growing problem that no one has made a realistic attempt to solve. Glad someone has finally started working on it.

    This isn't a realistic solution... About all we can conceivably do right now is go snatch larger hardware assemblies and either bring them down or put them into parking orbits out of the way. Getting the real dangerous stuff, moving at huge relative velocities is like trying to catch bullets using your fingers. All you will do is put a whole though your fingers and likely just create more junk in the process.

    We would have better luck if we would vaporize this stuff from the ground or push it into decaying orbits using lasers or something. Trying to go up and catch it using a net is not going to work unless you can get the relative velocities nearly identical and who has the time and energy for that?

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  5. What a waste of time... by bobbied · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm no rocket scientist but this is nuts. We are going to launch some satellite, have it capture another one, then deorbit both of them? What a waste! A waste of energy and technology to launch such hardware just to throw it away. Not to mention that orbiting broken satellites might have some useful components we might consider trying to recycle. A big dish antenna is heavy, but could conceivably be reused and save launch weight on the next satellite.

    These larger pieces of space junk are easy to track, few in number, and thus are not that dangerous. What we really need is a solution that allows us to start clearing out the smaller pieces of junk. Maybe by just nudging them around until they are in decaying orbits, or vaporizing them using lasers. If we are going to talk pie in the sky, let's do something more useful...(and perhaps more likely to be successful.)

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  6. Re:Very needed by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

    It's also a solution that requires a lot of fuel

  7. Re:Very needed by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

    We need to start by grabbing and deorbiting the largest debris pieces, before they spall off smaller pieces. Space junk gets harder to economically intercept with decreasing size, but solar pressure will eventually sweep out the smallest stuff.

  8. Gelatinous cubes by Solandri · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Figure out a cheap way to make a low-density material aerogel in space. Make a large quantity of it as a single mass (doesn't have to be a cube - could be a sphere) and put it into an eccentric orbit which intersects some of the orbits with the most junk. The stuff is good at catching small high-velocity particles without fragmenting. The high surface area to mass ratio means its orbit will decay a lot quicker than regular junk. So put it into a (relatively) high orbit where it'll collect junk for a few years, before aerodynamic drag degrades its orbit and it (and the junk it's caught) burns up on re-entry.

    1. Re:Gelatinous cubes by Richard+Kirk · · Score: 2

      Mod +1 for D&D reference.

      Not too happy about the rest of this., though. I have worked with aerogel. It is weird stuff. It may be able to stop tiny particles but it tears easily. Most of the experiments that used aerogel to capture small particles from comets and suchlike kept the aerogel in a tin. So, for every bit it captures because some paint chip digs straight into it, it may lose a chunk from the surface when another paint chip hits it a glancing blow. And if you are up there long enough, and space is big so you will have a long wait until your cosmic flypaper is full, so there is a fair chance something the size of a dustbin will make a real mess of it.

      I may well be wrong on this. Aerogel is pretty tough for something that is almost not there at all, and maybe a big enough bit will be stable. But I imagine trying to stop rifle bullets in space with a large roll of bubble wrap...