Minimal space-suit
|
|
Thread rating:  |
James Moughan - 31 Aug 2003 00:56 GMT I've been wondering, just what is the minimum protection you can get away with and still be able to function effectively in a vacuum?
Say you're breathing pure oxygen at 2psi. That's a partial pressure of 1/3 below sea-level, which should be adequate providing you site the training facility on a mountain or dope your astronauts with Epo. If my math is on (flipping imperial system!) then the pressure at the bottom of a 4 foot column of water is about 2ps1. 4 feet is less than the distance from my heart to my feet. Therefore I hand-wave that the vascular system can support an internal pressure of 2psi without any outside help, and so, I'm guessing, can the skin. In that case, there's no actual need for a pressure suit. You ought to be able to get away with an oxygen mask covering the eyes, nose and mouth.
So, the only additional problem I see is being able to expel air from your lungs at 2psi. I doubt this is possible, mind you. However, a tunic made out of some elastic material to squeeze the lungs (and maybe the stomach while you're at it, this could be uncomfortable otherwise) ought to suffice.
Add a thermal-control overall to prevent you from frying or freezing, and voila...
Or am I overlooking something?
Ian Stirling - 01 Sep 2003 23:04 GMT > I've been wondering, just what is the minimum protection you can get > away with and still be able to function effectively in a vacuum? > > Say you're breathing pure oxygen at 2psi. That's a partial pressure > of 1/3 below sea-level, which should be adequate providing you site Various places use 5PSI pure O2 as a second choice to sea-level mix. This corresponds quite well to the 4.6 PSI you need to get the same partial pressure of oxygen at the lung wall (there is water vapour and CO2 there too).
In the article with message-ID: <1018565841.10667.0.nnrp-01.9e98d142@news.demon.co.uk> posted in april 2002, I posted the results of some sums. At 1.8PSI you'r groggy and weak, even if acclimitised. At 2.1PSI, more or less OK. <snip>
> vascular system can support an internal pressure of 2psi without any > outside help, and so, I'm guessing, can the skin. In that case, > there's no actual need for a pressure suit. You ought to be able to > get away with an oxygen mask covering the eyes, nose and mouth. <snip>
> Or am I overlooking something? Yes. Fluid will rapidly pool in the limbs causing them to become swolen and useless.
You need something to provide a pressure in the flesh that's high enough to squeeze the blood back from the extremeties to the heart.
The skin usually does this, with the help of the lymphatic system. However, in space this won't work nearly well enough.
However, do some searching on "skin suit". Basically, you use a tight elasticated suit to maintain a pressure over the body, hope the lymphatic system can iron out any minor inconsistancies, and don't pressurise the suit, only having a pressurised helmet. Gloves are a big problem, owing to the complex geometry. The torso is another problem, leading some to suggest just doing the limbs, and using a hard torso.
 Signature http://inquisitor.i.am/ | mailto:inquisitor@i.am | Ian Stirling. ---------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------- Two fish in a tank: one says to the other, "you know how to drive this thing??"
Tom Burke - 09 Sep 2003 13:53 GMT I think you're all missing an important point... HEAT. It's danged cold in shadow (background temp of deep space is ~4K, and in the sunlight, it's danged hot (Huge amount of unfiltered solar energy)... I suppose you could cover your suit with a couple of layers of MLI, though - but that stuff's pretty fragile, & you'd be quick to overheat in it, because it's too good of an insulator while in a vacuum (something like 99.5% efficient)
> > I've been wondering, just what is the minimum protection you can > > get away with and still be able to function effectively in a [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > ------------ Two fish in a tank: one says to the other, "you know > how to drive this thing??" Ian Stirling - 09 Sep 2003 23:49 GMT > I think you're all missing an important point... HEAT. It's danged > cold in shadow (background temp of deep space is ~4K, and in the But you have no conductive or convective cooling.
How cold is space? Well, assuming the body has an area of 1.5 meters square, and the skin is at 27C, that's 690W of heat lost. (stephan-boltzman)
Reading from a (too small) table indicates that the equivalent heat loss happens at a wind-chill of -13C.
In LEO, the earth is a big factor, as it's around 180 degrees of radiator at a few C.
So that'll be near 450W in LEO.
So, in deep space in sunlight, a naked person loses around 200W (heavy shivering should make this up), and in LEO, gains around 200W.
> sunlight, it's danged hot (Huge amount of unfiltered solar energy)... Around 1.2 times the maximum on earth, not really very huge.
> I suppose you could cover your suit with a couple of layers of MLI, > though - but that stuff's pretty fragile, & you'd be quick to > overheat in it, because it's too good of an insulator while in a > vacuum (something like 99.5% efficient) <snip quoted message incorrectly placed at bottom>
Sweating through the suit may well work. The sunlight is more or less the same as on earth, though the humidity is always 0%.
In terms of emergency suits. The body is largely made of water, and if the circulation is working, it all has to heat or cool by around 3C or so before you have much danger of actual immediate problems.
Totally insulated from the surroundings, and working hard, you've still got 20-30 minutes before you pass out.
Even adding in sunlight, it's still well over 10 minutes.
 Signature http://inquisitor.i.am/ | mailto:inquisitor@i.am | Ian Stirling. ---------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------- He had been eight years upon a project for extracting sunbeams out of cucumbers, which were to be put in vials hermetically sealed, and let out to warm the air in raw inclement summers. -- Jonathan Swift, "Gulliver's Travels" (1726)
Henry Spencer - 14 Sep 2003 17:55 GMT >I think you're all missing an important point... HEAT... > I suppose you could cover your suit with a couple of layers of MLI, >though - but that stuff's pretty fragile, & you'd be quick to >overheat in it, because it's too good of an insulator while in a >vacuum (something like 99.5% efficient) The orthodox answer to this for skinsuits is that you put an insulation layer (not necessarily MLI), with vents, outside the suit itself. Since it isn't airtight, it can be just clothes you put on, fastened with zippers or buttons -- think of ski pants and parka. That evens out extremes and blocks raw sunlight, leaving you with a need to get rid of metabolic heat, which you do the same way you do on Earth: by sweating into vacuum, straight through the suit.
That also provides some level of micrometeorite protection, which is desirable.
 Signature MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! | henry@spsystems.net
Bill Bogen - 16 Sep 2003 12:37 GMT >snip< > However, do some searching on "skin suit". > Basically, you use a tight elasticated suit to maintain a pressure over > the body, hope the lymphatic system can iron out any minor inconsistancies, > and don't pressurise the suit, only having a pressurised helmet. >snip< One problem re: skin suits that I've never seen discussed: Assuming 7psi air pressure in the helmet and a 10 inch diameter opening, there would be 550 pounds of force pushing the helmet upwards. A pressurized suit would balance that force, carrying the load over much of the outwardly-stretched non-permeable layers. But a non-pressurized skin suit would tend to concentrate that force through a groin-circling harness, would it not? Imagine doing a 8 hour EVA wearing the equivalent of a parachute harness while under 3 gees acceleration. Ice pack, please!
Ian Stirling - 18 Sep 2003 14:44 GMT >>snip< >> However, do some searching on "skin suit". [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > wearing the equivalent of a parachute harness while under 3 gees > acceleration. Ice pack, please! It's a bit tricky to get the balance between keeping inward pressure constant over the whole skin, and not pinching bits. This is trivial for spherical astronauts.
However, looking at the outline of the body from the top and bottom, the total areas match.
Consider a naked human in 0G and 14PSI. Cover them with a rigid surface with a helmet at one end. Now, exposure to vacuum won't change the internal pressure.
The trick in a skinsuit is to copy the internal stresses produced by this rigid surface with a flexible one that lets the astronaut move around.
If done right, there is no problem. However, this is rather tricky.
 Signature http://inquisitor.i.am/ | mailto:inquisitor@i.am | Ian Stirling. ---------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------- "The theory of everything falls out trivially." -- Etherman, sci.physics kook.
Earl Colby Pottinger - 02 Sep 2003 02:06 GMT moughanj@tcd.ie (James Moughan) :
> I've been wondering, just what is the minimum protection you can get > away with and still be able to function effectively in a vacuum? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Or am I overlooking something? You just re-invented the skinsuit. Check out:
http://yarchive.net/space/science/skinsuits.html
http://www.google.com/search?&q=skinsuit+vacuum
 Signature I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos, SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp
MSu1049321 - 02 Sep 2003 05:40 GMT Skinsuits have been posited by SF writers for some time. Niven I think did a riff on them once or twice. A skin-tight membrane similar to a wetsuit contains the body under pressure, in some versions, it is semi-permeable to allow sweat cooling of the body. Usually in the stories a thermal and micrometeroid overgarment still is worn over it. It would make a fascinating experiment in materials science. Once you can make a suit so form-fitting as to become usable as pressure garment, how do you get into and out of it? Maybe it is painted on you? ;-) A tear in such a garment would probably make for an ugly wound, looking like what happens when you boil a kielbasa too long...
G EddieA95 - 02 Sep 2003 15:56 GMT > 2psi without any >outside help, and so, I'm guessing, can the skin. In that case, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >So, the only additional problem I see is being able to expel air from >your lungs at 2psi Nope. The breath will rush from your lungs, but you can't *inhale* if you body is under vacuum. The water vapor and CO2 produced in the lungs has a partial pressure of 1psi; this will distend the thorax and make breathing movements impossible, besides which 1psi of oxygen is insufficient for human life.
Bear in mind, oxygen masks deliver gas at *ambient* pressure. For Everest climbers this is 29,000 ft; in space, it is zero.
Besides which, most of a body is water at 37C, and above 63,000 ft, water *boils* at 37C. Even if you could somehow get your breath, your blood vessels would fill with steam bubbles in a very nasty way.
Henry Spencer - 02 Sep 2003 19:42 GMT >Say you're breathing pure oxygen at 2psi. That's a partial pressure >of 1/3 below sea-level, which should be adequate providing you site >the training facility on a mountain... Not necessarily. What you care about is the partial pressure at the lung wall, not in the surrounding air. They differ because air going into the lungs is diluted by CO2 and water vapor coming out. That dilution is by roughly an absolute amount, *not* proportional to total pressure, so it affects thinner atmospheres more. So you need more than just a similar partial pressure.
The Apollo suits -- which would have run at a lower pressure if they possibly could, for greater flexibility -- ran pure oxygen at 3.85psi.
>If my math is on (flipping imperial system!) then the pressure at the >bottom of a 4 foot column of water is about 2ps1. 4 feet is less than >the distance from my heart to my feet. Therefore I hand-wave that the >vascular system can support an internal pressure of 2psi without any >outside help, and so, I'm guessing, can the skin. Plausible reasoning, but the details don't work out. As little as 1.5psi excess pressure in your lungs, relative to your skin, involves serious risk of lung rupture. This is not just theory; scuba divers deal with this operationally. If you take dive training, you will get it hammered into you that you MUST NOT hold your breath even momentarily during ascent, because as little as 1 meter of ascent with a closed airway can become a life-threatening medical emergency.
 Signature MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! | henry@spsystems.net
Greg D. Moore (Strider) - 02 Sep 2003 21:33 GMT > I've been wondering, just what is the minimum protection you can get > away with and still be able to function effectively in a vacuum? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Or am I overlooking something? Two things. Partial pressure at 2psi is not enough. I believe you really need almost the full partial pressure of oxygen to make this work.
In any case, google for skinsuit and you should find a bunch of research on this very subject.
(note, the skin itself can handle even higher pressure differentials than 2psi. But there are other issues thta come up.
Anthony Q. Bachler - 03 Sep 2003 08:04 GMT There are other factors to consider. The sunlight in space is ~7 times brighter than on the surface of the earth, and completely unfiltered. Anyone lounging around in a tank top will get the worst sunburn of their life not to mention a raging case of leukemia or worse. this coupled with subdural hematommas over every exposed surface will make for a rather unhappy afternoon.
See dick see dick go EVA without his pressure suit see dick go blind as his inner-ocular pressure blows his optic nerve out the back of his eyeball. see dick get a bad bad sun burn and funny lumps on all his major organs see dick get one REALLY BIG BRUISE over his entire body see dick gasp for air as his blood tries to take the path of least resistance out of his lungs dont be a dick, wear your space suit.
 Signature "Yea, all israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him." Daniel 9-11
> I've been wondering, just what is the minimum protection you can get > away with and still be able to function effectively in a vacuum? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Or am I overlooking something? Geoffrey A. Landis - 08 Sep 2003 21:41 GMT > There are other factors to consider. The sunlight in space is ~7 > times brighter than on the surface of the earth, 1.35
> ...
 Signature Geoffrey A. Landis http://www.sff.net/people/geoffrey.landis
Jordin Kare - 10 Sep 2003 06:37 GMT > > There are other factors to consider. The sunlight in space is ~7 > > times brighter than on the surface of the earth, > > 1.35 You (Anthony) may be thinking of total insolation -- effectively proportional to the average power a solar cell can generate, and therefore the number of interest in comparing space power satellites to ground-based solar power -- which on Earth includes the decrease in sunlight flux away from noon (due to both geometry and increased atmospheric absorption) and of course the lack of sunlight at night. Geoff can doubtless cite exact numbers, but a factor of 4 to 5 is reasonable; a factor of 7 is a little high but not unreasonable for, say, wintertime at 40 deg. latitude vs. high Earth orbit. Not the same as brightness.
 Signature Jordin Kare
"Point and click" means you're out of ammo.
Anthony Q. Bachler - 12 Sep 2003 06:22 GMT Hmm, perhaps you are right. The figure 7 stuck in my head from somewhere, which was more likely than not a space based powersat discussion ( Im an EE by trade ). The remainder of my post holds I do believe.
 Signature "Yea, all israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him." Daniel 9-11
Matti Anttila - 03 Sep 2003 19:39 GMT > I've been wondering, just what is the minimum protection you can get > away with and still be able to function effectively in a vacuum? > ... > Or am I overlooking something? Interesting thoughts. As a mixed-gas diving instructor I have some thoughts regarding your post:
First, please excuse my use of metric units instead of imperial. (For reference: 1 ATM = 14.7 psi ~= 1 bar)
Normal ppO2 (partial pressure of oxygen) in sea-level atmosphere is 0.21 bar. A normal human can survive, without training, with 0.16 bar ppO2. With some training, this can be reduced to about 0.13-0.11 for a short periods, but this reduces also physical and mental performance. So, let's keep it in 0.16 bar, what is also the minimum accepted level in mixed-gas diving (while in rest).
So, if you use pure oxygen instead of air, you can drop the ambient pressure to 0.16 bar, which is 1/6 of sea-level ambient pressure (1 bar, 1 ATM). But you can't drop the pressure suddenly. See: Decompression (Google etc.) Anyway, with proper decompression time you can be exposed to one sixth of sea level pressure, if you're breathing pure oxygen. And for short periods and some acclimation, you can reach even one tenth of sea-level pressure. But this is the limit, no matter what you do, without pressure suit.
The vacuum conditions: If you are exposed to vacuum, there are some lethal aspects: 1) If exposed suddenly, you do need to exhale your lungs *fast*, otherwise your lungs will explode. Not like in horror-movies (cheast open), but you'll rip your lung tissue and get an embolia/emphysema. 2) If you survive above, then you'll have few seconds before black-out due to the lack of oxygen. 3) Keep your eyes shut. They are moist, and water evaporates (boils...) from the surface of your eyes. This happens also to your tongue and mouth.
You won't freeze, even in cold space, for some time. Human body is water, and water has large heat capacity, and freezing to icycle takes some time. And you won't explode due to the internal blood pressure. Your lungs might, in worst conditions, if you don't exhale.
Anyway, with some kind of "belt" in your chest, you still can't survive. While human propably can be exposed to vacuum for some seconds without "exploding", the pain due to the internal pressure could be awful. You do need full protection. And in space, you have to take the thermal aspects into account also. And possible radiation issue etc. So, in my opinion, the minimum space suit would be a suit that can take the one sixth of sea level pressure, and the suit would have a rebreather system to provide you oxygen and get rid of the carbondioxiode.
Matti Anttila www.antti.la
Joseph S. Powell, III - 04 Sep 2003 21:45 GMT > > I've been wondering, just what is the minimum protection you can get > > away with and still be able to function effectively in a vacuum? [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > Matti Anttila > www.antti.la How about a suit with tight leather straps all around - that should provide the pressure, but you'd still need some type of helmet in a vacuum.
If you had a helmet with an O2 supply but no real suit, perhaps you could wrap some Duct Tape around your body, reaaaal, real tight (over your clothes ) and a jacket and snow pants or something similar over it - this could possibly protect the duct tape from coming apart due to exposure to the bright sunlight. In a pinch, it's better than nothing, I suppose.
Joann Evans - 04 Sep 2003 22:53 GMT [snip]
> How about a suit with tight leather straps all around - that should provide > the pressure, but you'd still need some type of helmet in a vacuum. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the bright sunlight. > In a pinch, it's better than nothing, I suppose. Sure. But then it's just a BDSM afficionado's idea of what others have called a 'skin suit.'
G EddieA95 - 05 Sep 2003 00:22 GMT >If you had a helmet with an O2 supply but no real suit, perhaps you could >wrap some Duct Tape around your body, reaaaal, real tight (over your >clothes ) and a jacket and snow pants or something similar over it - this >could possibly protect the duct tape from coming apart due to exposure to >the bright sunlight. >In a pinch, it's better than nothing, I suppose.
>If you had a helmet with an O2 supply but no real suit, perhaps you could >wrap some Duct Tape around your body, reaaaal, real tight (over your >clothes ) and a jacket and snow pants or something similar over it - this >could possibly protect the duct tape from coming apart due to exposure to >the bright sunlight. >In a pinch, it's better than nothing, I suppose. Duct tape applied over clothing would not provide the needed pressure. And your hands aren't protected at all; if you lose the use of those, in space, you're dead (if you weren't already).
|
|
|