In Orbit Propellant Transfer

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fissou11

Guest
Hi there,<br />In the process of in orbit propellant transfer from one spacecraft to another, a docking mechanism is required. Is it true that the docking pin of the servicing craft is connected to the propellant tank via a pipe (the pipe is also attached to a pressure gauge and a pump)? And is the docking hole of the serviced satellite attached to the propellant tank in the same way? <br />I am a bit confused about this. It would be much appreciated if you can make this clear<br /> <br />
 
N

nacnud

Guest
The only on orbit reproppelanting? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> that I know of is from the Progress to the ISS, I'll try and dig up some details.
 
P

propforce

Guest
What you're referring is specific design concept for on-orbit propellant transfer. The best thing to look at is the ISS docking mechanism as they do propellant/fluid transfer from both Soyuz & Shuttle Orbiter. <br /><br />Other than that, Boeing is doing the Orbital Express (OE) under DARPA funding. Orbital Sciences (OSC) did the DART spacecraft funded by NASA but knocked the spacecraft out of its orbit instead of capturing it <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
Actually, they only do it from the Progress to Zvezda, and then only when the Progress is docked at the aft port.<br /><br />Shuttle cannot transfer propellant or coolant to or from the station, nor can Soyuz, as they lack the neccesary hookups. Shuttle does transfer drinking water, but I believe this is done the old-fashioned way -- by filling bags and then carrying them through the hatch by hand. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
N

nacnud

Guest
Progresses docked to Pirs apear to be able to transfer proppelant. Not sure about the Zarya ports.
 
F

fissou11

Guest
Thanks for your supports. Does anyone know a web link that gives details of the mechanical structure of the docking mechanisms mentioned above?
 
N

nacnud

Guest
You're after the Russian cone and drouge docking system. I've found a few schematics but nothing very detailed. This seems the best diagram I can find.
 
S

steve82

Guest
I'm really grasping here but for some reason Kathy Sullivan's name comes to mind.
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
Is the air transferred via ducts or hoses that the astronauts have to hook up manually after docking? Or does the docking process itself make the connection? Even worse than the hoses would be tanks requiring a spacewalk.<br /><br />How is fuel transferred from the Progress cargo ships? <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
The page mentions a "sophisticated fuel transfer system" and fuel tanks stored outside the pressurized area. So that suggests a automatic system.<br /><br />That is one side. How about the shuttle part? <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>
 
S

shoogerbrugge

Guest
I remember reading something about in orbit propellant transfer in Soyuz book by Hall & Shaylers, let me dig it out for you.<br /><br />The docking collar is fitted with two ports for propellant transfer, at least with the old Progress vehicles. There is some pretty complicated shematics about the whole refeulling proces on page 249, but I got no scanner, so Im afraid I have to refer you to the local library for that.<br /><br />This is from the same book:<br />The fuek transfer process began either under the control of the onboard crew, or automatically from mission control. The latter allowed refeulling of the station without interrrupting the work schedule of the crew, or when the station was abadonned.<br /><br />After verification of the integrity of each transfer line, the Salyut were closed, and the operational pressure of 220atm reduced by introducing nitrogen from the Salyut pressure feeding system back into the nitrogen storage tanks. In the course of several days this proces reduced the pressure in the fuel tanks down to 3atm, the UDHM war pressure fed from the Pregress tanks to the Salyut tanks by means of the cargo vessel's own onboard nitrogen supplies located in the propellant moduoe. With the progress tanks pressurised to 8 atm, fuel was forced from the fuel tanks onboard progress to the station. This in turn forced nitrogen in the Salyut fuel tanks back into the storage tanks. After all UDMH was transferred the process was repeated for nitrogen tetroxide, using the separate set of pipes and connections. After both the UDMH and nitrogen tetroxide are transferred the lines are purged with nitrogen to prevent residual propellant spillage during undocking. The whole proces is pretty slow, because they have plenty of time and it would use to much electricity when the pace would be stepped up. I assume the basicly the same system has been used on both MIR and the ISS, with minor modifications. <br /><br />I have no clue though how water is transferred from the
 
S

shoogerbrugge

Guest
Thanks shuttle guy.<br /><br />About the air transfer, I've seen pictures of hoses being transferred to the Progress when the crew was working there to unbolt all the cargo, to supply enough fresh air. The pictures were from MIR however, is the same routine used on the ISS?<br /><br />
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>I have no clue though how water is transferred from the Progress, the tanks are located in the unpressurised part of the vehicle though<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I don't believe Progress has water tanks in the unpressurized part of the vehicle; just propellant and pressurization tanks. So the water would be uploaded the same way as any other logistics: in containers that the crew would have to manually offload out of the pressurized compartment. Just like Shuttle.<br /><br />Of course, Shuttle <i>does</i> have water tanks. The neat thing about the Shuttle's potable water supply is that it comes from the fuel cell system. The hydrogen and oxygen reactants combine to form pure water, which can then be tapped to fill bags which are then transferred to the station. (Shuttle also transferred surplus water to Mir on the Shuttle-Mir missions. After all, it would just be drained on Earth anyway, and the Mir crew could make use of it.) When STS-121 flies, take a peek at the flight schedule. They actually schedule in the filling and transferring of water bags. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
E

erioladastra

Guest
"They are not hoses but ducts to direct the air flow. "<br /><br />But there are hoses to transfer O2 for EVA prebreath or to represurize the Airlock O2 tanks. Same for N2 tanks.
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
No, the ISS gets all of its power from photovoltaic cells. Fuel cells just aren't useful for a long-duration mission. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
P

propforce

Guest
<font color="yellow">Fuel cells just aren't useful for a long-duration mission. </font><br /><br />Fuel cells can run for a long time, however; it would've consume too much propellants. IIRC, the shuttle Orbiter fuel cell stack consumes over 100 lbm/hour of oxygen. <br /><br />Anyway, I am sure that's what you meant by "... aren't useful for a long duration mission..." <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
Precisely. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />One of the cooler fuel-cell concepts I've seen was from the Helios project, which ended prematurely due to the crash of the Helios Pathfinder aircraft (a big solar-powered flying wing, which now holds the altitude record for a conventional powered airplane). The idea was to build a fuel cell which could recharge itself. During the day, it would use surplus power from Helios' solar cells to dissociate hydrogen and oxygen from water stored onboard. During the night, it would reverse the process, generating electricity and water. I believe that this is the next logical step for fuel cells -- self-regenerating fuel cells that effectively act like rechargable batteries.<br /><br />You still need something else to generate the electricity in the first place, though. Aboard the space station, this sort of a system could replace the batteries that get it through orbital night, but it could not produce drinking water; it would have to retain all of the water it produced in order to make hydrogen and oxygen again during daylight. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
R

rocketman5000

Guest
What is the operation life of a typical fuel cell compared to a battery. I am all for new tech, but only as long as it offers some sort of advantage<br />
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

recklessasiandriver
Question Dual Stage 4 Grid Ion Drive possibilities
Replies
3
Views
2K
Space Travel & SpaceX
Phillip Huggan
Phillip Huggan
Admin
Chinese rocket body breaks up in orbit after successful satellite launch
Replies
0
Views
345
Article Commentary
Admin
Admin
Mental Avenger
Proposed Viable Mars Colonization
Replies
1
Views
2K
Space Travel & SpaceX
Mental Avenger
Mental Avenger
Phillip Huggan
hull metal inclusions and ion engine idea
Replies
3
Views
2K
Space Travel & SpaceX
Phillip Huggan
Phillip Huggan
E
Possible structure of our Sun
Replies
1
Views
2K
Our Solar System
Ero
E

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom