DOCSLIB.ORG

Sowers NIAC Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Thermal Mining of Ices on Cold Solar System Bodies NIAC Phase I Final Report February 2019 George Sowers 1 Purpose This is the final report of the NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Phase I study: Thermal Mining of Ices on Cold Solar System Bodies. It is submitted as partial fulfillment of the obligations of the Colorado School of Mines (CSM) under grant number 80NSSC19K0964. 2 Table of Contents List of Figures 5 List of Tables 9 1.0 Executive Summary 10 2.0 Introduction 15 3.0 Solar System Survey of Thermal Mining Targets 18 3.1 Potential Thermal Mining Targets 19 3.2 Thermal Mining Beyond the Moon 32 4.0 Thermal Mining Mission Context: Lunar Polar Ice Mining 34 4.1 Lunar Polar Ice Distribution Analysis 36 4.2 System Architecture 39 4.3 Functional Analysis 42 4.4 Ice Extraction Subsystem 46 4.5 Power Subsystem 53 4.6 Deployment and Setup 55 4.7 Operations 59 4.8 Mass and Cost Estimates 66 4.8.1 Subsystem Mass Estimates 66 4.8.2 Total Mass 70 4.8.3 Subsystem Cost Estimates 71 4.8.4 Total Cost 74 4.9 Business Case Analysis 76 4.9.1 The Propellant Market 76 4.9.2 Business Case Scenarios 80 4.9.3 Business Case Results 83 4.9.4 Comparison to Previous Analysis 87 5.0 Proof of Concept Testing 91 5.1 Testing Objectives and Approach 91 5.2 Icy Regolith Simulants 91 5.3 Block 1 Testing 95 5.3.1 Block 1 Apparatus 95 5.3.2 Block 1 Methodology 96 5.3.3 Block 1 Results 97 5.4 Block 2 Testing 105 5.4.1 Block 2 Apparatus 105 5.4.2 Block 2 Methodology 105 5.4.3 Block 2 Results 105 5.5 Test Conclusions 106 6.0 Summary and Conclusions 115 6.1 Bulletized Summary 115 6.2 Conclusions 116 6.3 Recommendations for Future Work 118 7.0 References 121 8.0 Appendix A: Solar System Catalogue 129 9.0 Appendix B: Acronym List 132 3 Acknowledgements This report was prepared by George Sowers, Ross Centers, David Dickson, Adam Hugo, Curtis Purrington, and Elizabeth Scott. It was reviewed by Chris Dreyer and Angel Abbud-Madrid. Cover art is by Matt Olson showing the ice extraction system in a lunar permanently shadowed region (PSR). 4 List of Figures 1.0 Executive Summary Figure 1.1. Ice extraction on the Moon. 10 Figure 1.2. The inner solar system. 11 Figure 1.3. Ice extraction system concept. 12 Figure 1.4. CSM medium cryo-vacuum chamber. 13 2.0 Introduction Figure 2.1 Moving from exploration results to a proven reserve. CRIRSCO, 2012. 15 Figure 2.2. Heat applied to an icy regolith simulant sample under cryogenic vacuum conditions. 16 Figure 2.3. Thermal Mining based ice extraction system on the Moon. 17 3.0 Solar System Survey of Thermal Mining Targets Figure 3.1. The inner and outer Solar System. 18 3.1 Potential Thermal Mining Targets Figure 3.2. Mercury, with detected water ice in yellow. 19 Figure 3.3. Mars, widespread glacial ice in blue, detected by MRO radar passes in yellow. 20 Figure 3.4. Mars, example of steep scarps with visible water ice. 20 Figure 3.5. Comet 67P (top right), close-up of two areas of exposed water ice (bottom left). 21 Figure 3.6. 24 Themis, approx. orbit of asteroid (red). 22 Figure 3.7. Ceres, approx. true-color image. 22 Figure 3.8. 65 Cybele, approx. orbit of asteroid (blue). 23 Figure 3.9. Ganymede, surface and subsurface layers, visualized. 23 Figure 3.10. Calisto, approx. true-color image. 24 Figure 3.11. Europa, side view of ice and hydrothermal vents. 24 Figure 3.12. Jupiter Trojans, two groups of Trojan objects (green). 24 Figure 3.13. Titan, exposed water ice on the surface (blue). 25 Figure 3.14. Iapetus, leading hemisphere (left), trailing hemisphere (right). 25 Figure 3.15. Dione, trailing hemisphere (left), leading hemisphere (right). 26 Figure 3.16. Tethys, trailing hemisphere (left), leading hemisphere (right). 26 Figure 3.17. Enceladus, side view of ice and hydrothermal vents. 27 Figure 3.18. Mimas, image of moon (left), heat map of daytime temperatures (right). 27 Figure 3.19. Phoebe, the irregular moon. 28 Figure 3.20. Hyperion, seen here with its porous and sponge-like exterior. 28 Figure 3.21. Chariklo, Hubble Space Telescope image of the largest centaur. 28 Figure 3.22. Titania, Voyager 2 image of the largest moon of Uranus. 29 Figure 3.23. Triton, Voyager 2 image of the largest moon of Neptune. 29 Figure 3.24. Relative locations of Neptune’s L4 and L5 Trojans. 30 Figure 3.25. Relative sizes, colors, and albedos for some of the large Trans-Neptunian objects. 30 Figure 3.26. Orcus & moon Vanth, Hubble Space Telescope image of the dwarf planet Orcus (center) and its moon (center-bottom). 31 5 Figure 3.27. Pluto & moon Charon, image of Pluto (left), enlarged image of Pluto’s moon Charon (right). 31 Figure 3.28. Eris & moon Dysnomia, Hubble Space Telescope image of the most massive dwarf planet (center) and its moon (center-left). 32 4.0 Thermal Mining Mission Context: Lunar Polar Ice Mining Figure 4.0.1. Ice exposures at the North Pole and South Pole of the Moon. 34 Figure 4.0.2. Resource exploration (prospecting) roadmap. 35 4.1 Lunar Polar Ice Distribution Analysis Figure 4.1.1. Initial results from the CSM model. 37 Figure 4.1.2. Comparison of ice concentration vs depth for three lunar terrain types. 38 4.2 System Architecture Figure 4.2.1. High-Level Space Supply Chain. 39 Figure 4.2.2. Propellant Production Architecture. 40 Figure 4.2.3. Ice extraction concept. 41 Figure 4.2.4. Ice extraction subsystem. 41 Figure 4.2.5. IHOP Water Processing Overview (Paragon Corp.) 42 4.3 Functional Analysis Figure 4.3.1. Capture tent functional tree. 43 Figure 4.3.2. Cold trap hauler functional tree. 44 Figure 4.3.3. Secondary optics functional tree. 45 4.4 Ice Extraction Subsystem Figure 4.4.1. The Capture Tent. 46 Figure 4.4.2. Capture Tent product tree. 47 Figure 4.4.3. Capture tent legs in lowered tent (left) and raised tent (right) positions. 49 Figure 4.4.4. Cold trap hauler. 50 Figure 4.4.5. Cold trap hauler product tree. 50 Figure 4.4.6. Secondary optics. 51 Figure 4.4.7. Secondary optics product tree. 52 Figure 4.4.8. Secondary optics mirror geometry. 52 4.6 Deployment and Setup Figure 4.6.1. The Vulcan/Centaur rocket. 55 Figure 4.6.2. Centaur 5. 55 Figure 4.6.3. XEUS, the Centaur 5 stage equipped with a landing kit. 56 Figure 4.6.4. Deployment and setup sequence. 57 4.7 Operations Figure 4.7.1. Overall process flow. 59 Figure 4.7.2. Ice collection and transport flow. 59 Figure 4.7.3. Notional mining site map. 60 Figure 4.7.4. Tent placement pattern. 60 Figure 4.7.5. Ice hauler transit time. 61 6 Figure 4.7.6. Ice hauler duty cycle. 62 Figure 4.7.7. Tent repositioning flow. 63 Figure 4.7.8. Capture Tent and ice hauler in the towing configuration. 63 Figure 4.7.9. The capture tent being moved across the PSR. 64 4.8 Mass and Cost Estimates Figure 4.8.1. Propellant production system architecture. 66 Figure 4.8.2. Subsystem mass comparison. 71 Figure 4.8.3. Development and production cost by subsystem. 73 4.9 Business Case Analysis Figure 4.9.1. Benefits of refueling with space sourced LO2/LH2 propellants. 77 Figure 4.9.2. ∆V map of cislunar space. 77 Figure 4.9.3. Propellant prices in cislunar space. 78 Figure 4.9.4. Propellant production program plan. 83 Figure 4.9.5. Cumulative cash for the Propellant Production Company. 84 Figure 4.9.6. Scenario 1. IRR sensitivity with propellant price and non-recurring cost. 85 Figure 4.9.7. Scenario 2. IRR sensitivity with propellant price and NASA investment. 86 Figure 4.9.8. Scenario 3. IRR sensitivity with propellant price and NASA investment. 86 Figure 4.9.9. Cumulative cash for NASA. 87 5.2 Icy Regolith Simulants Figure 5.2.1. Lunar Highlands Simulant –1 Spec Sheet, Exolith Labs. 92 Figure 5.2.2. Granular Icy Regolith Simulant, 12% Water Weight. 93 Figure 5.2.3. Sample Container submerged in LN with LN feed through. 93 Figure 5.2.4. ‘Mud Pie’ icy regolith simulant, 12% water weight. 94 Figure 5.2.5. Frost Layer Production, Simulant and Container at 77K. 94 5.3 Block 1 Testing Figure 5.3.1. Left: Adiabatic Boundary Condition, Right: Isothermal Boundary Condition. 95 Figure 5.3.2. View from Vacuum Chamber port during an adiabatic boundary test. 96 Figure 5.3.3. Mud Pie Surface Condition after a 5-hour test. 97 Figure 5.3.4. Cross-Section diagram of Mud Pie Icy Regolith physical analysis results. 98 Figure 5.3.5. Temperature profile response of various ice grain configurations at depth of 2cm with a 12wt% water. 98 Figure 5.3.6. General physical subsurface structure of granular fine simulant with isothermal boundary condition with an initial water of 5.6wt% or 12wt%. 99 Figure 5.3.7. General physical subsurface structure of granular fine simulant with adiabatic boundary condition with an initial water of 5.6wt% or 12wt%. 100 Figure 5.3.8.
Recommended publications
  • EPSC2012-280 2012 European Planetary Science Congress 2012 Eeuropeapn Planetarsy Science Ccongress C Author(S) 2012

    EPSC2012-280 2012 European Planetary Science Congress 2012 Eeuropeapn Planetarsy Science Ccongress C Author(S) 2012

    EPSC Abstracts Vol. 7 EPSC2012-280 2012 European Planetary Science Congress 2012 EEuropeaPn PlanetarSy Science CCongress c Author(s) 2012 A Simulation of exosphere of Ceres Ruby Lin Tu (1), Wing-Huen Ip(1,2,3) and Yung-Ching Wang (3) (1) Institute of Space Science, National Central University, Taiwan, (2) Institute of Astronomy, National Central University, Taiwan, (3) Space Science Institute, Macau University Science and Technology, Macau Abstract For the purpose of tracing the ballistic trajectories of water molecules on Ceres’ surface, we have to After Vesta, the NASA Dawn spacecraft will visit the produce a surface temperature map by omitting the largest asteroid Ceres, to carry out in-depth topographic variations and the presence of impact observations of its surface morphology and craters. Our model solves the heat conduction mineralogical composition. We examine different equation by taking account of the energy balance source mechanisms of a possible surface-bounded condition at the surface boundary and the lower exosphere composed of water molecules and other boundary condition (with dT/dz=0) into account. In species. Our preliminary assessment is that solar between the heat diffusion equation is solved by wind interaction and meteoroid impact are not using the Crank-Nicolson finite difference routine adequate because of the large injection speed of the gas at production relative to the surface escape velocity of Ceres. One potential source is a low-level (1) outgassing effect from its subsurface due to thermal sublimation. In this work, the scenario of building up a tenuous exosphere by ballistic transport and the eventual recycling of the water molecules to the polar cold trap is described.
  • (Unin)Habitable? Runaway Greenhouse

    (Unin)Habitable? Runaway Greenhouse

    GEOS 22060/ GEOS 32060 / ASTR 45900 What makes a planet (unin)habitable? Runaway greenhouse Lecture 8 Tuesday 30 April 2019 Logiscs • Homework 1 and Homework 2 are graded • Homework 3 will be issued on Wed or Thu and due on Fri 10 • Total number of homeworks will be 6 (hopefully 7) • Midterm feedback form results: Course outline Founda6ons (1-2 weeks) • Earth history • HZ concept, atmospheric science essenEals • Post-Hadean Earth system Principles – how are habitable planets ini6ated and sustained? (4-5 weeks) • Volale supply, volale escape TODAY • Runaway greenhouse, moist greenhouse • Long-term climate evoluEon • Specifics (2.5 weeks) • Hyperthermals on Earth Earth science • Early Mars • Oceans within ice-covered moons • Exoplanetary systems e.g. TRAPPIST-1 system planetary science Lecture 7 wrap-up • Energy-limit: XUV driven escape more-likely- than-not sculpts the exoplanet radius-period distribuEon (‘photo-evaporaon valley’) • Diffusion limit: what regulates H loss from Venus, Earth and Mars today • Impact erosion – giant impacts and planetesimal impacts Wrap-up: impact erosion Nuclear tests Hydrocode Terrestrial impact craters Two-stage gas gun Formaon of Earth-sized planets involves giant (oligarchic) impacts. Masses of resulEng planets (Earths) * = giant impacts The output underlying this plot was generated by C. Cossou. The Moon-forming Simula8on intended to impact was not reproduce “typical” the last big impact Kepler system of short-period, on Earth, but it was 8ghtly-packed inner planets the last Eme that Earth hit another planet. The atmosphere-loss escape efficiency of giant impacts is set by the ground-moEon speed Schlichng & Mukhopadhay 2018 Ocean removal by giant impacts? (Ocean vaporizaon != ocean removal) Simulaons suggest that the Moon- forming impact was marginally able to remove any pre-exisEng Earth ocean 2 Qs ~ ve for oligarchic impact Stewart et al.
  • Water Loss from Terrestrial Planets with CO2-Rich Atmospheres

    Water Loss from Terrestrial Planets with CO2-Rich Atmospheres

    Water loss from terrestrial planets with CO2-rich atmospheres R. D. Wordsworth Department of the Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago, 60637 IL, USA [email protected] and R. T. Pierrehumbert Department of the Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago, 60637 IL, USA ABSTRACT Water photolysis and hydrogen loss from the upper atmospheres of terrestrial planets is of fundamental importance to climate evolution but remains poorly understood in general. Here we present a range of calculations we performed to study the dependence of water loss rates from terrestrial planets on a range of atmospheric and external parameters. We show that CO2 can only cause sig- nificant water loss by increasing surface temperatures over a narrow range of conditions, with cooling of the middle and upper atmosphere acting as a bottle- neck on escape in other circumstances. Around G-stars, efficient loss only occurs on planets with intermediate CO2 atmospheric partial pressures (0.1 to 1 bar) that receive a net flux close to the critical runaway greenhouse limit. Because G-star total luminosity increases with time but XUV/UV luminosity decreases, this places strong limits on water loss for planets like Earth. In contrast, for a CO2-rich early Venus, diffusion limits on water loss are only important if clouds caused strong cooling, implying that scenarios where the planet never had surface liquid water are indeed plausible. Around M-stars, water loss is primarily a func- arXiv:1306.3266v2 [astro-ph.EP] 12 Oct 2013 tion of orbital distance, with planets that absorb less flux than ∼ 270 W m−2 (global mean) unlikely to lose more than one Earth ocean of H2O over their lifetimes unless they lose all their atmospheric N2/CO2 early on.
  • Icebreaker: a Lunar South Pole Exploring Robot Cmu-Ri-Tr-97-22

    Icebreaker: a Lunar South Pole Exploring Robot Cmu-Ri-Tr-97-22

    ICEBREAKER: A LUNAR SOUTH POLE EXPLORING ROBOT CMU-RI-TR-97-22 Matthew C. Deans Alex D. Foessel Gregory A. Fries Diana LaBelle N. Keith Lay Stewart Moorehead Ben Shamah Kimberly J. Shillcutt Professor: Dr. William Whittaker The Robotics Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh PA 15213 Spring 1996-97 Executive Summary Icebreaker: A Lunar South Pole Exploring Robot Due to the low angles of sunlight at the lunar poles, craters and other depressions in the polar regions can contain areas which are in permanent darkness and are at cryogenic temperatures. Many scientists have theorized that these cold traps could contain large quantities of frozen volatiles such as water and carbon dioxide which have been deposited over billions of years by comets, meteors and solar wind. Recent bistatic radar data from the Clementine mission has yielded results consistent with water ice at the South Pole of the Moon however Earth based observations from the Arecibo Radar Observatory indicate that ice may not exist. Due to the controversy surrounding orbital and Earth based observations, the only way to definitively answer the question of whether ice exists on the Lunar South Pole is in situ analysis. The discovery of water ice and other volatiles on the Moon has many important benefits. First, this would provide a source of rocket fuel which could be used to power rockets to Earth, Mars or beyond, avoiding the high cost of Earth based launches. Secondly, water and carbon dioxide along with nitrogen from ammonia form the essential elements for life and could be used to help support human colonies on the Moon.
  • Cold Traps out of Glass Or Stainless Steel for the Vacuum Technology

    Cold Traps out of Glass Or Stainless Steel for the Vacuum Technology

    Cold traps out of glass or stainless steel for the vacuum technology KGW-ISOTHERM Karlsruher Glastechnisches Werk 76185 Karlsruhe Gablonzerstraße 6 Tel:0721/ 95897-0 Fax: 0721 / 95897-77 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.kgw-isotherm.com A 16 Cold traps: construction, operation and principles Cold traps are used in conjunction with vacuum pumps to collect condensation produced from humidity or solvents and these cold traps can be used for many different tasks. The most common application is collecting condensation produced from humidity or solvents from rotating discs, vacuum pumps or high vacuum systems that use‘s oil diffusion or turbo-molecular pumps. In this case a common coolant such as liquid nitrogen (LN2) or dry-ice (CO2) with acetone is normally used. Another application is the production of condensation from specific substances at a constant, predefined temperature. This can be realised by using a coolant at a constant, predefined temperature, a thermostat or a Kaltgas system. Cold traps can be manufactured out of glass or metal. The use of glass is advantageous in the chemical sector and when producing condensation from solvents, due to its resistance to chemicals. All glass cold traps listed in this catalogue are produced solely from borosilicate glass 3.3, in compliance with DIN/ISO (DURAN made by Schott). The mechanical design takes into account the wall thickness for use under vacuum. Material - glass All the glassware produced by KGW - ISOTHERM are made of borosilicat glass 3.3 DIN/ISO 3585. The glass has the following characteristics: Chemical characteristics hydrolytic resistance : according to DIN-ISO 719 (98°C) acid resistance : according to DIN-ISO 1776 alkaline resistance : according to ISO 695-A2 Physical characteristics linear expansion factor : 3,3 x 10-6 1/K (at 20°C-300°C) density : 2,23 g/cm3 specific thermal capacity : 910 J/kg K transformation temperature : 525 °C Admissible Operation Conditions for cold traps made of glass Temperature range -200°C to +200 °C Pressure range standard vacuum to atm.
  • Jjmonl 1802.Pmd

    Jjmonl 1802.Pmd

    alactic Observer John J. McCarthy Observatory G Volume 11, No. 2 February 2018 A porpoise or a penguin or a puppet on a string? — Find out on page 19 The John J. McCarthy Observatory Galactic Observer New Milford High School Editorial Committee 388 Danbury Road Managing Editor New Milford, CT 06776 Bill Cloutier Phone/Voice: (860) 210-4117 Production & Design Phone/Fax: (860) 354-1595 www.mccarthyobservatory.org Allan Ostergren Website Development JJMO Staff Marc Polansky Technical Support It is through their efforts that the McCarthy Observatory Bob Lambert has established itself as a significant educational and recreational resource within the western Connecticut Dr. Parker Moreland community. Steve Barone Jim Johnstone Colin Campbell Carly KleinStern Dennis Cartolano Bob Lambert Route Mike Chiarella Roger Moore Jeff Chodak Parker Moreland, PhD Bill Cloutier Allan Ostergren Doug Delisle Marc Polansky Cecilia Detrich Joe Privitera Dirk Feather Monty Robson Randy Fender Don Ross Louise Gagnon Gene Schilling John Gebauer Katie Shusdock Elaine Green Paul Woodell Tina Hartzell Amy Ziffer In This Issue OUT THE WINDOW ON YOUR LEFT .................................... 4 REFERENCES ON DISTANCES ............................................ 18 VALENTINE DOME .......................................................... 4 INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION/IRIDIUM SATELLITES .......... 18 PASSING OF ASTRONAUT JOHN YOUNG ............................... 5 SOLAR ACTIVITY ........................................................... 19 FALCON HEAVY DEBUT ..................................................
  • 1 on the Origin of the Pluto System Robin M. Canup Southwest Research Institute Kaitlin M. Kratter University of Arizona Marc Ne

    1 on the Origin of the Pluto System Robin M. Canup Southwest Research Institute Kaitlin M. Kratter University of Arizona Marc Ne

    On the Origin of the Pluto System Robin M. Canup Southwest Research Institute Kaitlin M. Kratter University of Arizona Marc Neveu NASA Goddard Space Flight Center / University of Maryland The goal of this chapter is to review hypotheses for the origin of the Pluto system in light of observational constraints that have been considerably refined over the 85-year interval between the discovery of Pluto and its exploration by spacecraft. We focus on the giant impact hypothesis currently understood as the likeliest origin for the Pluto-Charon binary, and devote particular attention to new models of planet formation and migration in the outer Solar System. We discuss the origins conundrum posed by the system’s four small moons. We also elaborate on implications of these scenarios for the dynamical environment of the early transneptunian disk, the likelihood of finding a Pluto collisional family, and the origin of other binary systems in the Kuiper belt. Finally, we highlight outstanding open issues regarding the origin of the Pluto system and suggest areas of future progress. 1. INTRODUCTION For six decades following its discovery, Pluto was the only known Sun-orbiting world in the dynamical vicinity of Neptune. An early origin concept postulated that Neptune originally had two large moons – Pluto and Neptune’s current moon, Triton – and that a dynamical event had both reversed the sense of Triton’s orbit relative to Neptune’s rotation and ejected Pluto onto its current heliocentric orbit (Lyttleton, 1936). This scenario remained in contention following the discovery of Charon, as it was then established that Pluto’s mass was similar to that of a large giant planet moon (Christy and Harrington, 1978).
  • Comparative Kbology: Using Surface Spectra of Triton

    Comparative Kbology: Using Surface Spectra of Triton

    COMPARATIVE KBOLOGY: USING SURFACE SPECTRA OF TRITON, PLUTO, AND CHARON TO INVESTIGATE ATMOSPHERIC, SURFACE, AND INTERIOR PROCESSES ON KUIPER BELT OBJECTS by BRYAN JASON HOLLER B.S., Astronomy (High Honors), University of Maryland, College Park, 2012 B.S., Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, 2012 M.S., Astronomy, University of Colorado, 2015 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences 2016 This thesis entitled: Comparative KBOlogy: Using spectra of Triton, Pluto, and Charon to investigate atmospheric, surface, and interior processes on KBOs written by Bryan Jason Holler has been approved for the Department of Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences Dr. Leslie Young Dr. Fran Bagenal Date The final copy of this thesis has been examined by the signatories, and we find that both the content and the form meet acceptable presentation standards of scholarly work in the above mentioned discipline. ii ABSTRACT Holler, Bryan Jason (Ph.D., Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences) Comparative KBOlogy: Using spectra of Triton, Pluto, and Charon to investigate atmospheric, surface, and interior processes on KBOs Thesis directed by Dr. Leslie Young This thesis presents analyses of the surface compositions of the icy outer Solar System objects Triton, Pluto, and Charon. Pluto and its satellite Charon are Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs) while Triton, the largest of Neptune’s satellites, is a former member of the KBO population. Near-infrared spectra of Triton and Pluto were obtained over the previous 10+ years with the SpeX instrument at the IRTF and of Charon in Summer 2015 with the OSIRIS instrument at Keck.
  • Environmental Health and Safety Vacuum Traps

    Environmental Health and Safety Vacuum Traps

    Environmental Health and Safety Vacuum Traps Always place an appropriate trap between experimental apparatus and the vacuum source. The vacuum trap: • protects the pump, pump oil and piping from the potentially damaging effects of the material; • protects people who must work on the vacuum lines or system, and; • prevents vapors and related odors from being emitted back into the laboratory or system exhaust. Improper trapping can allow vapor to be emitted from the exhaust of the vacuum system, resulting in either reentry into the laboratory and building or potential exposure to maintenance workers. Proper traps are important for both local pumps and building systems. Proper Trapping Techniques To prevent contamination, all lines leading from experimental apparatus to the vacuum source must be equipped with filtration or other trapping as appropriate. • Particulates: use filtration capable of efficiently trapping the particles in the size range being generated. • Biological Material: use a High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filter. Liquid disinfectant (e.g. bleach or other appropriate material) traps may also be required. • Aqueous or non-volatile liquids: a filter flask at room temperature is adequate to prevent liquids from getting to the vacuum source. • Solvents and other volatile liquids: use a cold trap of sufficient size and cold enough to condense vapors generated, followed by a filter flask capable of collecting fluid that could be aspirated out of the cold trap. • Highly reactive, corrosive or toxic gases: use a sorbent canister or scrubbing device capable of trapping the gas. Environmental Health and Safety 632-6410 January 2010 EHSD0365 (01/10) Page 1 of 2 www.stonybrook.edu/ehs Cold Traps For most volatile liquids, a cold trap using a slush of dry ice and either isopropanol or ethanol is sufficient (to -78 deg.
  • Hearing Conservation

    Hearing Conservation

    Stench Chemicals Stench chemicals are a group of chemicals that exhibit an extremely foul smell. Even though most stench chemicals have little direct impact on the physical health and safety of researchers, use of these chemicals without an odor control plan can have an effect on both the laboratory environment as well as the outside environment. Therefore, it is important that researchers carefully control their use of all stench chemicals in order to minimize the impact on other workers and neighbors. Examples of Stench Compounds A few examples of stench chemicals are: thiols (mercaptans), sulfides, selenides, amines, phosphines, butyric acid and valeric acid. Among the chemicals listed above, thiols, also referred to as mercaptans, are the most commonly used group, and are therefore discussed in further detail below. Thiols (Mercaptans) Thiols are a class of organosulfur compounds characterized by the presence of one or more sulfhydryl (-SH) groups. Since 1937, thiols have been added to natural gas (which is naturally odorless) as an odorant to assist with detecting natural gas leaks. Thiols exhibit a moderate level of toxicity, and their use does not require special safety precautions. Thiols are characterized by their disagreeable odors at parts per million (ppm) concentrations, and have an odor threshold of only 0.011 ppm. Due to their addition to natural gas, the detection of their odor automatically leads to suspicion of natural gas leaks in or near buildings where they are used. Thus, the use of even small quantities of thiols in laboratory experiments without odor control measures in place can cause concern for other building occupants, people passing by outside, or even the occupants of adjacent buildings.
  • Educators' Guide

    Educators' Guide

    Educators’ Guide 2018-2019 Dear Educators, The 2020-2021 Educators’ Guide is packed full of exciting opportunities for you and your stu- dents. Come to the Herrett Center to learn and engage with our museum galleries, Faulkner Planetarium, and Centennial Observatory. In this guide, you will find listings of the many programs that the Herrett Center has to offer schools, information on how to schedule class visits, and tips for how to get the most out of your trip to the Herrett Center. The Education team at the Herrett Center is always willing to work with you to find the pro- gram that is the best fit for your students and curriculum. Our mission is to create meaningful, engaging experiences, and we can’t wait to see you and your class at the museum! All the best, Kindy Combe, Education Coordinator Covid-19 and Field Trips The Herrett Center staff is committed to continuing to provide fun, educational experiences for students coming to the Herrett Center, while also providing a safe, clean environment dur- ing this pandemic. Changes have been made to how we book multiple groups, museum ex- hibits, procedures for groups in the museum, and more. Please see below for a list of changes to keep in mind when booking a field trip to the Herrett Center for Arts and Science: Personal Protection Masks or face shields are required for all school group participants, both students and adults. Staff and volunteers are required to wear face masks when engaging closely with school groups and the public. Dedicated entrances and exits have been clearly marked.
  • Jjmonl 1502.Pmd

    Jjmonl 1502.Pmd

    alactic Observer GJohn J. McCarthy Observatory Volume 8, No. 2 February 2015 Fireball From Space A Romulan plasma torpedo? . Not exactly. See inside, page 19 The John J. McCarthy Observatory Galactic Observer New Milford High School Editorial Committee 388 Danbury Road Managing Editor New Milford, CT 06776 Bill Cloutier Phone/Voice: (860) 210-4117 Production & Design Phone/Fax: (860) 354-1595 www.mccarthyobservatory.org Allan Ostergren Website Development JJMO Staff Marc Polansky It is through their efforts that the McCarthy Observatory Technical Support has established itself as a significant educational and Bob Lambert recreational resource within the western Connecticut Dr. Parker Moreland community. Steve Barone Jim Johnstone Colin Campbell Carly KleinStern Dennis Cartolano Bob Lambert Mike Chiarella Roger Moore Route Jeff Chodak Parker Moreland, PhD Bill Cloutier Allan Ostergren Cecilia Dietrich Marc Polansky Dirk Feather Joe Privitera Randy Fender Monty Robson Randy Finden Don Ross John Gebauer Gene Schilling Elaine Green Katie Shusdock Tina Hartzell Jon Wallace Tom Heydenburg Paul Woodell Amy Ziffer In This Issue OUT THE WINDOW ON YOUR LEFT ................................... 4 FEBRUARY NIGHTS ....................................................... 14 MARE TRANQUILLITATIS .................................................. 5 JUPITER AND ITS MOONS ................................................ 16 JUPITER AT OPPOSITION ................................................... 6 TRANSIT OF THE JUPITER'S RED SPOT .............................