How can we deal with Lunar fines?

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

willpittenger

Guest
During Apollo, lunar dust was a major problem. It interfered with seals and posessed a health risk. It also ground moving parts. (Fortunately, our rovers of the era weren't used for long enough for that to be a problem. So how we prevent these problems when we return?<br /><br />BTW: As I recall, the dust is slightly magnetic. So it would stick to ferrous surfaces.<br /><br />Edit: BTW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
Q

qso1

Guest
This is an excellent question and applies to mars as well. I mentioned this in my graphic novel series and touched upon some of the problems, especially in martian dust storms. I would imagine as they get closer to realizing the goal of the VSE...this issue will take up a lot more time than it did in Apollo due to the extended stays planned for the VSE program.<br /><br />One of the things that may be doable is parking rovers a couple hundred feet from habitats and putting down perhaps a rollout carpet like walking surface from the hab to the rover. Then of course, position the rover each use so as to cause any kicked up dust to go in a direction away from the hab.<br /><br />The astronauts will also probably be doing much more in the way of chores...additional cleaning of hab interior surfaces. In fact, some surfaces could be deliberately designed to attract dust away from places where you don't want it. Particularly ferrous surfaces that could be strategically placed to attract dust away from places where its not wanted.<br /><br />Just a few ideas and no doubt, dust will be a significant issue in maintaining a safe environment in lunar and mars bases. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
[During Apollo, lunar dust was a major problem... It also ground moving parts. (Fortunately, our rovers of the era weren't used for long enough for that to be a problem.]<br /><br />"This is an excellent question and applies to mars as well...this issue will take up a lot more time than it did in Apollo due to the extended stays planned for the VSE program."<br /><br />It occurs to me that time is not the issue when it comes to dust. It's the mileage that matters, not the time. How many miles travelled by a rover's wheels, how many times an airlock door is opened and closed, etc., that is what counts.<br /><br />Consider the MER rovers currently functioning on Mars. One rover (I forget which) has already lost use of one of it's wheels and travels backwards dragging the wheel behind it. Presumably dust has damaged the wheel to the point where it no longer functions (though thermal cycling might be at fault instead). But how many miles of dusty terrain has that wheel traveled before it failed? Not much. Those MER travel at a snails pace and haven't covered many miles at all compared to the distances covered by the Apollo manned rovers. <br /><br />
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>One rover (I forget which) has already lost use of one of it's wheels and travels backwards dragging the wheel behind it.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />That's Spirit. Its power system is also failing. Warranty expired. It was a mere 90 days. Sound familar? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
I don't know if the Martian fines are magnetic or not. However, they are corrosive. That would cause problems unique to Mars. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
Q

qso1

Guest
Mileage does matter to be sure. And one things for certain...future human missions to the moon or mars will involve more surface activity. Not only would dust problems be present with rovers but EMUs as well. Stowage of EMUs when not in use...maintaining a high state of cleanliness of EMUs each time prior to EVA.<br /><br />Airlocks will definetely be another dust problem. As willpittenger mentioned previously, seals. One can envision seals having to be replaced frequently. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
 
Q

qso1

Guest
Good point and that is one thing that one hopes the designers of such missions will keep in mind. The uniqueness of both places. The moon...no weather, no dust storms. Mars with its occasional dust storms. To mention just one unique feature of both. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
A lot of the angst over dust comes from the fact that spacecraft are assembled by astronautical engineers in clean rooms and then can't accept their nice sterile spacecraft will get dirty. People forget that we have a lot of experience with dusty environments on Earth. The mining, milling, metallurgical, and energy industries routinely cope with dusts which are abrasive, corrosive, toxic, carginogenic, explosive, conductive, magnetic, and radioactive, often in combination. The military of many countries routinely operate sophisiticated equipment - gas turbines, optical, IR and radio communication and sensor systems, envirtonmental monitors - in highly dusty and smoking environments. While both the Moon and Mars will have unique environments none the less many dust abatement strategies developed here will work there. <br /><br />Jon<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
1

1cooldaddyo

Guest
OK, so from now on all spacecraft development is done outside at White Sands. If that stuff doesn't gum up the works, you should be good to go. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Seriously, with regard to the Lunar dust, since it is apparently electrically active it would seem possible to come up with some sort of electrostatic repulsion.
 
B

bpfeifer

Guest
NASA and others have been doing a lot of research on dust mitigation techniques. I can’t remember where I heard or read these, or I’d post links. I know some are from NASATV while others are from articles I’ve read. <br /><br />You can design rear-entry space suits that dock with your lander. Since no one has to go through an airlock, you’ve pretty much eliminated health risks associated with bringing dust inside.<br /><br />You can also wear jumpsuits over EVA suit. This is akin to the disposable suits worn by HAZMAT or nuclear workers. Again, the jumpsuits are removed before entering the spacecraft. In addition to health risks, this will also reduce the damage done to bearings/joints on the EVA suits.<br /><br />NASA is working on electrostatic tools for removing dust. These range from wands to airlock barriers.<br /><br />My own suggestion has to do with scratched face shields and equipment lenses. NASCAR racecars start a race with several layers of clear mylar film covering the glass of their windshields. Ad the windshield gets dirty during the course of the race, they peel off one layer of mylar at a time. This would also work to protect optical equipment on the Moon from the abrasive nature of lunar dust. I don’t know how mylar would perform in the thermal and radiation environment of the Moon, but I’m certain a similar system would be trivial to develop.<br /><br />None of these actually address the issue of the rover, or other mechanical equipment. I suspect that a flexible sleeve will cover some joints, some will just need to be engineered for robustness, and some will simply require periodic maintenance and replacement. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Brian J. Pfeifer http://sabletower.wordpress.com<br /> The Dogsoldier Codex http://www.lulu.com/sabletower<br /> </div>
 
S

steve70

Guest
The company I work for manufacters blades for turbine engines. We just got a very large contract with Honeywell to make blades to replace the ones being chewed up by desert sand in the M1 Abrams. Although I doubt the lunar rovers will be getting the miles put on them That the M! dose in the Gulf.
 
G

gawin

Guest
The new Rovers sould be built by Cat and Johndeer rather then LockMart and Boing. They have some serious exp. building equipment for dirty conditions. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />
 
D

docm

Guest
Yup, plus tell NASA etc. to bring in BAJA racers & mechanics before they build <b><i>anything</i></b> <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /><br /><br />Best way to handle the dust is by using booted constant velocity joints for the steering & axels and tightly sealed "hubcaps", boots & solid rims to secure the wheel races. The steering mechanism itself could come off any minivan, but with boots sealing the knuckles.<br /><br />Dirt racers have been using these techniques forever.<br /><br />Electric drive could handle forward/reverse/speed control <i>and</i> the braking with the minimum of parts. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>A lot of the angst over dust comes from the fact that spacecraft are assembled by astronautical engineers in clean rooms and then can't accept their nice sterile spacecraft will get dirty. People forget that we have a lot of experience with dusty environments on Earth.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Please note that the equipment for moon would be far more delicate than Earth-bound equipment. Part of the problem is the weight requirement. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>You can design rear-entry space suits that dock with your lander. Since no one has to go through an airlock, you’ve pretty much eliminated health risks associated with bringing dust inside.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />The space between the doors is the problem. The doors can't move before connecting without exposing the astronaut to vacuum.<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>I don’t know how mylar would perform in the thermal and radiation environment of the Moon, but I’m certain a similar system would be trivial to develop.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />I recall that the descent stage of the Apollo lander was covered in mylar. However, I have to wonder if the film would affect the optic clarity or not. All it would take is a slight wrinkle. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
I like it. However, they have no experience building vehicles for operating in a vacuum with little to no maintence and may need some telepresence capability. The later might include operating, say, excavator arms from inside the cabin of a pressurized rover with lousy visibility. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<i>Please note that the equipment for moon would be far more delicate than Earth-bound equipment. Part of the problem is the weight requirement.</i><br /><br />Using light materials and engineering for 1/6 G rather than 1G removes a lot of the weight issues. Note that gas turbines and military sensors are also delicate and that mass is critical in man portable equipment, helicopters and (surprisingly) armoured vehicles.<br /><br />Jon<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<i>But it also makes those structures more filmsy.</i><br /><br />Not neccessarily, remember stresses are lower in 1/6 G. Of course you would have to allow a margin for muscle bound astronauts.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<i>The space between the doors is the problem. The doors can't move before connecting without exposing the astronaut to vacuum. </i><br /><br />Obviously. But since rear-entry space suits have been in use for many years, and airlock doors for deaces, I think we can safely assume that the doorsd don't move unless they are required to.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
D

docm

Guest
Why bother with live-crewed diggers, cargo moving etc? Perfect place for telepresence. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
Telepresence requires a presence. The closer the better. Even Earth to LEO is too far for pratical use. That is why I said Robonaut couldn't help Hubble. You need astronauts on the surface. We might be talking about humans inside a pressurized rover (as I already mentioned), but we need the human presence anyway. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
If you bump into a rock like Sojourner did on Mars, the impact is the same. We may be talking about bulldozers and excavators. Stuff like that would help us bury habitats and get a cross section of the surface crust. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<i>If you bump into a rock like Sojourner did on Mars, the impact is the same.</i><br /><br />It's just a matter on managing approach speeds. You can't drive fast on the Moon. Apollo LRV experience showed that anything over 12 kph was dangerously fast.<br /><br /><i>We may be talking about bulldozers and excavators. Stuff like that would help us bury habitats and get a cross section of the surface crust.</i><br /><br />Definitely. They need not be very big though. Something like a small Bobcat or Dingo would be ideal and wight in at under a tonne apiece. Some of this equipment is already designed for teleoperation.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
G

gawin

Guest
Actually when I mentioned CAT I was joking but after giving it some thought.<br /><br />Many of the new excavators they make are already fly by wire so making them tele-operational would be relatively easy. About the only major modification would be the power source and again replacing the diesel engine with an electric to power the hydraulic pump would also not take a lot of engineering. A mini excavator and a bobcat modified for lunar work rather then creating a whole new system makes one hell of a lot of sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts