It seems that NASA is going to stick with the BEAM module on the ISS for quite some time, and is currently using it for storage. That's pretty cool. However, I was wondering if the BEAM module could, for instance, be used to replace a current, rigid module strictly from the perspective of radiation and heat - I know that it's basically an empty balloon, so it can't be used for much more without more equipment being installed.
- 148,791
- 53
- 476
- 1,473
- 6,250
- 1
- 21
- 40
-
1not exactly radiation: Why do they believe that the Bigelow Expandable Activity Module has “taken a hit”? – uhoh Aug 12 '19 at 17:37
-
1@uhoh: indeed, but apparently the module's shielding worked just fine for that impact (it's mentioned in the original article I sourced in my question and Bigelow states that the module did what it was supposed to - stop the impactor) – Michael Stachowsky Aug 12 '19 at 17:39
1 Answers
Heat:
It should be fine from the perspective of thermal insulation. The aluminium that makes the 'rigid' bits rigid has high thermal conductivity, and contributes almost nothing to the thermodynamics of the station. Also as heat moves fairly liberally inside the ISS, in a way it sort of is already having its thermal properties demonstrated. There is some question of how it handles the temperatures though (degradation over time, reduced strength, etc).
Radiation:
This is a bit more tricky but again the answer seems to be yes, though this is really only as a result of the rigid sections also not being great radiation shields. See: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2956-space-station-radiation-shields-disappointing/ in fact in some ways the aluminium contributes to the radiation does the astronauts receive as a result of the cascade of particles caused by cosmic rays impacting it. Some evidence suggests the polymers that make up BEAM do better: https://spaceflight.nasa.gov/spacenews/factsheets/pdfs/radiation.pdf
However both are still active areas of research, and part of why NASA are looking to contiune operating BEAM: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-may-extend-beam-s-time-on-the-international-space-station. Though if I understand correctly collision resistance is the primary characteristic of interest.
- 3,432
- 9
- 21