Author Topic: Degradation of materials in space?  (Read 1174 times)

Degradation of materials in space?
« on: 06/25/2022 02:08 am »
I was reading on Twitter that the hatches of the ISS station were degraded due to the temperature changes in space, what could be done to build more durable structures in space?

The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2148
  • Liked: 753
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Degradation of materials in space?
« Reply #1 on: 06/27/2022 12:52 am »
I was reading on Twitter that the hatches of the ISS station were degraded due to the temperature changes in space, what could be done to build more durable structures in space?

Vacuum ablation is gonna be tough to stop.

There might be a case for low coefficient of expansion materials for seals?

Other than that, maybe physical covers to keep the hatches permanently shadowed?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35998
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 18438
  • Likes Given: 397
Re: Degradation of materials in space?
« Reply #2 on: 06/27/2022 02:11 am »
I was reading on Twitter that the hatches of the ISS station were degraded due to the temperature changes in space, what could be done to build more durable structures in space?



More mass

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35723
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 19888
  • Likes Given: 10367
Re: Degradation of materials in space?
« Reply #3 on: 06/27/2022 09:31 am »
I was reading on Twitter that the hatches of the ISS station were degraded due to the temperature changes in space, what could be done to build more durable structures in space?



More mass
Maybe shades would be slightly less mass than adding sufficient margin to the door structure to not require shades.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Hobbes-22

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 841
  • Acme Engineering
    • Acme Engineering
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 398
Re: Degradation of materials in space?
« Reply #4 on: 06/27/2022 10:07 am »
How would you shade a door that can get sunlight from an entire hemisphere?

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4427
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 6458
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Degradation of materials in space?
« Reply #5 on: 06/27/2022 11:18 am »
How would you shade a door that can get sunlight from an entire hemisphere?
With a second, slightly larger door.
With more mass.

Offline Hog

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2536
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 1420
  • Likes Given: 5014
Re: Degradation of materials in space?
« Reply #6 on: 06/28/2022 02:46 am »
Any results from the Long Duration Exposure Facility(LDEF) that played some overtime before being retrieved?  From memory I remember many panels being poked nicely.
 

Paul

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6086
  • Liked: 3978
  • Likes Given: 3717
Re: Degradation of materials in space?
« Reply #7 on: 06/28/2022 05:06 am »
Any results from the Long Duration Exposure Facility(LDEF) that played some overtime before being retrieved?  From memory I remember many panels being poked nicely.

The results from LDEF are documented in several large volumes, which should all be available online.
(It was more involved to get printed volumes when they were written. )
There are much newer results from decades of sample exposures on the ISS. Newer materials, newer measurement techniques, etc.
This is an area of active work.
One can actually get a graduate degree in the field.

As for the question at hand, one really has to know the material and the cause of the degradation.
It’s not always what you think. 
Guessing at it is not particularly useful.

PS. I was fascinated by LDEF in the day.
Had a full copy of those result volumes.
Not only was LDEF gravity-gradient stabilized so it orbited “upright” with one end pointed at the Earth and the other away towards the zenith, but it had a forward facing “ram” side and a rearward facing “wake” side, despite being totally passive.  Not a fraction of a rotation in seven years.  It took me years to find out how they accomplished that.  Very clever.
« Last Edit: 06/28/2022 05:08 am by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1