Man, that thing ruptures in a fascinating way! It makes me think about the difference between hoop stress and axial stress. What's interesting is that your cylinder is so short, that the two are similar. It's fascinating to me that it ruptured in the AXIAL direction!? (Hoop normally fails first) There's an interesting analysis waiting to happen here! My guess is that my orientation is off because your geometry is so interesting! Would love to discuss.
Your channel is big enough you could probably cajole them into letting you do an in depth episode, maybe even some hypersonic light gas gun micrometeoroid impact test footage.
I did a graduate level study on inflatable space structures about 30 years ago. While we knew it was feasible, the materials development still had a long way to go back then. It's good to see things are progressing. Developing these for Moon or Mars based habitats will be key.
definitely compacting things as much as possible before launching is key. I love the idea of inflating, or unfolding, structures once in space (or on another body in the solar system). These processes will be quite valuable in developing the space infrastructure we will need to expand outward.
Can I ask you then? I thought the containers that makeup the ISS are made from metal for a reason, like radiation or floating debris. I know they have to use a shroud to cover the hatches from space dust, and we know an object the size of a bb can wipe out the station. So how's an inflatable going to be any safer?
I always ask the question when someone brings up the subject of leaving this planet…Why ? Why, when we have everything here that we need ! 😢 let’s work on/spend money on cleaning this planet up and ways of cleaning the emissions that we emit and in the meanwhile create habitable structures in case we can’t clean it all up and this planet becomes as uninhabitable as Mars and the moon that we are planing for ??? Doesn’t make a lot of sense imo
key to what? only reason to go to mars is to get its resources which could be done remotely but is not very easy as the transport back is gonna be a pain. living their is useless that place is way harsher to live than the worst place on earth is for the foreseeable future i could see benefit to testing in space cause of 0 gravity but i dont even see a reason to go to the moon and complicate things a 100fold. way easier to just stay in space and not have to worry about landing and launching of a different terrestrial body . and instead of them then pouring those resources to develop a habitable habitat on those very harsh terrestrial body's compared to earth they could pour those resources in making this planet more livable again without us having to change alot in the way we live now . seems alot easier to me as you barely have to travel and the circumstances here are way less harsh as there to begin with. and living in a bubble is like living in a prison but of your own choice without any fresh air not really enticing if you ask me.
75 psi is pretty crazy. I used to work in the brew industry and you’d surely explode a stainless steel serving vessel at that pressure. Glad I never saw that at work because from the looks of that blow out I probably wouldn’t be around to tell the story.
Nah, 75psi isn't that much; it is a little over 5 atmospheres, the pressure of being 53m under water (not that deep). The yield strength of mild steel is 247MPa, UTS of 841 MPa. That is only 517kPa, nowhere near enough.
@@joshbeaulieu7408 idk but isn't "a little over 5 atmospheres" a lot considering that in practice, this is supposed to withstand only like 1 atmosphere?
All I know is the pressure release valve was set at 30psi on those tanks. Id assume at 3 times that youd at least be starting to bow the container, not to mention the weight of liquid. I looked to see if one had ever exploded and couldn't find any compete ruptures due to over pressurisation so maybe they can hold much more. I know that safety was not the main concern when I worked at the brewery and its very easy to forget you have a tank being pressurized.@@ccllvn
»Great question, we have performed MMOD Hypervelocity Impact (HVI) Testing with NASA, utilizing high power machines that can shoot a projectile at the rate or velocity of an impact in space. We hope to share more in the future as we continue testing.«
I can't imagine aluminum is any better or this program wouldn't be feasible, it's the first thing anyone with any sense would question, I doubt they're just sweeping that under the rug though
Great question, we have performed MMOD Hypervelocity Impact (HVI) Testing with NASA, utilizing high power machines that can shoot a projectile at the rate or velocity of an impact in space. We hope to share more in the future as we continue testing.
what I love about anything space related when it comes to advancement, is that it's one of the few field when if something "fails" people are cheering about it because at worse it just mean they have more data to continue.
People are cheering because it passed the test and then they pushed it to the limit, if it had failed prematurely then they probably wouldn’t be cheering.
Basically a huge air suspension air bag. That's mighty impressive to withstand 75psi on that scale. A valve seal broke before the structure, that tells you something.
Congratulations on the successful test. When a puncture does occur (as it has on the iss) has it shown to be easier to patch than traditional rigid structures or more difficult? I am just curious of the methods of patching it overall this is a huge success and I know it's resistant to smaller impacts but obviously in time a puncture is inevitable.
I imagine a layer of liquid that fills any leak instantly, does not have to be very thick just enough thickness to carry enough liquid under pressure to work. The first thing I though about thou was size and how the starship booster could send a very large deflated habitat on top of it. I wonder how big they could go.
It's interesting to note, though NASA wanted to pass roughly DOUBLE the pressure at atmospheric conditions at sea level (The same as on the space station) Sierra more than doubled that again, to almost 5 times what it would be used at. A wonderful test.
The reason NASA wants double is because when you put this into a vacuum, that's the equivalent pressure differential when the thing is deployed in orbit if they put it at full sea level pressure. But it's good to see it do better.
Honestly, space junk seems like a showstopper for a real application for this, around Earth, at least, unless it can take several shots from a railgun, though, probably with lighter and less optimized projectiles than they're using now.
That was my this worry as well. Rigid space stations like the ISS have deflective plating to protect against debris strikes. What happens to this thing if it doesn't have shielding?
I was thinking once it's opened a solid hull could be added later, most likely a redundant protection I bet these guys could measure possibilities to an unfun level.
Honestly i wish that every field of science was still the way space development is, where the failures are praised as much as successes, and no matter what happens, they make sure to learn yet new facts and create even more advancements, looking forward, and not clinging to what has been done before
Why are you commenting this here? This wasn't a failure, it was supposed to blow up, they specifically tried to blow it up, it's called a "Burst Test" for a reason. This isn't like the SpaceX rocket blowing up when it wasn't supposed to. And nowhere, science or not, does anyone praise failure as much as success, for obvious reasons.
this wasn't a failure, it was tested UNTIL failure. Huge difference. If it failed at 5 PSI it would have been a failure, but since it failed ABOVE the required standard, it was a success. Failures are not celebrated anywhere, but it doesn't mean that we can't focus on the positive and move forward.
Congratulations everyone on this fantastic test. I've been a huge fan of Sierra Space from the days when your ship was a human-rated design and similarly, a huge fan of Bigelow inflatables. It really will be a dream come true for me when you guys get to orbit (and back), successfully deploy a LIFE structure as part of a station and reintroduce the human-rated design. Very very excited!
Thank you so much for your support. Our team has a lot in store for 2024 and we look forward to sharing more as we continue to develop our space station technology.
Interesting concept, I'm just wondering what happens when you'd have to repair a tear. I imagine you couldn't just sew it up with needle and thread or put a patch over it. With a metal hull you can just weld it closed, but I'm interested to hear about a solution in this context
Gotta ask, do you guys consider the possibility that tiny space debris could puncture the hull or is there a protection system in place that helps this inflatable hab defend itself against them?
I'm sure they've thought about an armor system, they mentioned in a comment that they've been doing hypervelocity impact tests. Would love to know more. They can always strap on some armor after the fact, but it would be cool to have an inflatable solution to minimize the number of launches and set-up work. Armor doesn't have to be rigid! There are actually some benefits to inflatable armor, it can have lots of room and baffles inside to disperse the energy of the impact...
At 2:42 you can see that layers 3 through 7 are MMOD (micrometeorite orbital debris) layers, Whipple shields with far greater spacing than is possible in rigid hull designs. These will provide protection better than any existing space station or vehicle.
Search "Sierra Space LIFE meteoroid protection" and see the first result, it's by Sierra Space. Also see @Chriss120 comment on this thread. Sierra Space responded, explaining the tests for this done with NASA.
75 PSI - or about 5x what you need in space? Seems like a good safety margin, although I'm not sure what pressure is usually maintained for space stations.
Our average operating pressure for Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and Deep Space is 14.7. For our Lunar Surface Habitat application, it will have a lower average operating pressure of 8 - 10 PSIG.
@@SierraSpace you should mention that thats for every square inch so 100s of thousands of pounds of pressure on the soft structure. Unless you dont want to scare people I guess. thats a pretty cool technology you got there.
This Is probably a stupid question, but, has anyone ever thought of filling these with water? Making a habitat, using the liquid resistance to the advantage of the human body!?!!
@@SierraSpaceGiven the abrasive nature of Lunar Regolith that it will be exposed to over time, is there additional shielding being designed for that habit or is it expected that the same technology can be safely used for Lunar applications without major redesign?
Great job. I'm equally impressed at the innovation being shown by Sierra Space here as I am by your willingness to openly share the back story and the results of this round of testing.
I am really looking forward to seeing a ton of these in orbit. I thought the idea might be DOA since Bigelow went out of business, but you guys are knocking it out of the park, awesome to see.
Back in the 1960's, as best I recall, there was a design for an inflatable station on the cover of a Popular Science/Mechanics Illustrated type magazine. The design was a Von Braun style station with the ring for rotation to simulate gravity. My copy of the issue is, however, long lost. :(
If you want to scale up your inflatables a torus is a better solution than a balloon. Tensile strength of the material is the limiting factor and has to increase linear with the radius of the balloon. In case of a torus - as long as the small radius can stand the interior pressure you can increase the big radius almost indefinitely. The possibility of artificial gravity by rotation is a bonus.
You can’t crush test full size vehicles unless you have unlimited money. Models and known engineering principles would have worked just fine for Titan, the owner/builder simply decided to short cut safety to save time and money. Disaster is always the outcome.
Well, they were already informed several times by different experts both independant and on the team itself that the sub was unsuitable to go to those depths, but ignored them and decided to use the sub anyways. A crush test wouldn't have changed their mind, I don't think.
it's the wrong test because their problem was a material fatigue problem. they likely did the test to excess. called it good. she's never tested how many dives it could take (it got a recommended and they ignored it anyway)
Very impressive design to achieve rupture at 5x over sea level pressure! Congratulations to the entire team for a very successful full scale hardware test. Know that can be a heart pounding event when so much is riding on a concept demonstration!
I hope you can get a land-based version of this going. Something that could be plopped down on Mars or the Moon in a small diameter payload, and then deploy inside a lava tube or crater. Pile some regolith on top for protection from micrometeors, and it could be an incredibly good temporary base! That, and they could make decent survival shelters, though I'm not sure 'inflatable bubbles' will ever be the MOST ideal out of any given set of solutions. But is there a link to a list of proposed applications for this?
We have more information available on our website, but we will be developing the systems and architecture for lunar, cislunar and deep space applications. www.sierraspace.com/space-destinations/life-inflatable-space-habitat/
@@SierraSpace Oh, that's so cool! Man, I'm so excited about your guys project. I think deployables is going to be the first step in any long-term space project. After all, when you show up to a new area, you don't start by building a cabin. You start by pitching a few tents!
I imagine that something like what OP is proposing, will be integrated later on down the road, after it survives its current mission directive first. And the data from these installations in a decade will assist in habitats and other structures that will be needed when we do make landfall someday on another world. Or dimension. Or reality.
I believe a lot of the internal fit out equipment and materials can actually be stored within the core of the inflatable. Once the habitat is inflated, crew can enter the module and assemble the internal fit out using the materials stored within the core.
There is a steel center piece that most likely would carry the parts. They will have to ingeniously pack everything in and around it and unfold it when needed.
I love to see this♥. Inflatable modules makes way more sense, than rigid body ones. I believe Sierra can only fail on production of these inflatable modules, either if they get stuck on developing one off custom sizes for new vehicles, or fail to build/finance factory for one size, that fits into most commonly launched vehicles, and potentially neatly stack into heavy lift vehicles.
Or nobody is buying. Many great ideas have fizzled out over the years because no matter how cool a concept might be - you need paying customers to succeed.
Rigid modules have the equipment, plumbing, windows, thrusters solar etc attached to the outer walls with the inner being the access way - very easy to configure on the ground. Inflatables are kind of reversed the equipment has to be in the rigid core tube or configured after it is inflated. If an inflatables is set up with the outside between the core and expanded walls -although the inflatable has more volume their utilisation of that volume is not as good. In space radiation protection another issue the soft walls are probably good at slowing or stopping cosmic rays but not so good for EM radiation - i think hard modules have better options for reducing both as the equipment mounted to the outer walls adds more shielding - although soft modules could be configured this way after they are deployed in space that involves more difficulty than with a rigid design that is preconfigured. Will be interesting to see how the inflatables go and how they compare with large rigid modules that will be possible with starship sized payload volumes.
Trouble is, Sierra can get far more capacity per launch loading onto New Glenn (7m diameter fairing) vs. commodity rockets and their 5.2m fairings. They didn’t partner with Blue Origin for nothing.
How are those not exploding without the 14 psi pressure we have on sea level? Why test even more? Shouldn't the test be the exact opposite? "Space" is somewhere at 1x10-¹⁷torr.
The fact that it still went so high after being repressurized from the first try, shows it also is durable. Also keeping in mind that there's exponential additional strain over one atmosphere, this test got to 5x, I'd find this more than safe for pressure. Failure won't be anywhere as dramatic, without some massive external force. _(for those concerned by dramatic demonstration at 5 atmospheres)_ Patching leaks out in space shouldn't be a huge issue, it would be closer to the first test where the pressure went slowly. Duct tape would be enough and add strength to any bulge or scratch. I'm sure there's some premade patches for any such issue as well. _I'd like to see some toroid segments eventually, angling the ends is only a slight geometry change, because being able to get even a fraction of artificial gravity in a station would be a massive next project._ _I'm always looking to the future._
If only humanity could actually work together, this type of achievement would occur daily. Bravo team, you guys will hopefully lead humanity to its next chapter.
One of the most fundamental drives (if not the most) of any living organism--including humans--is reproduction. That means finding a mate which by default--again by natures design--is a competition. As long as humans are reproducing there will always be a limit to how much we can cooperate.
Love this stuff. So many brilliant people doing amazing things across the space industry. Well done on the test! Can't wait to see this kit go to space.
but its all about ppl on earth/"home" as he called it helping 8 billion ppl, no? but for some reason there is a mom/dad/kid waving at a spaceship growing food and seeming to be LIVING in it... why would they need to grow food and live in that if they weren't escaping something? makes you wonder...
The idea, according to their presentations, is to put all connections (electrical, life support, data lines) in the base of metal ring connector. All other equipment will be delivered, mount and connected via hub in metal ring after module installed on space station.
We launch the softgoods packed around a metallic core that houses all operationa systems. Once the habitat is in space, it is pressurized and expanded to its operational volume. The additional volume once expanded is populated via additional transport vehicles such as the Dream Chaser spaceplane.
Thank you for sharing this! I love seeing your updates. Sierra Space, Axiom Space, and SpaceX are the coolest soace companies out there - each industry leaders in their own rights. Also, congratulations on the burst test. At what speed speed do you fill the article? The video makes it look fast, but do you fill, wait, fill, wait to make sure the article stays intact at predefined checkpoints?
@SierraSpace What are you expecting for operational lifespan and long-term maintenance/leak management and safety protocol? Btw, excited to see what you'll get to try out with interior design on this one, are you picturing doing furnishing sort of like a popup trailer, or to do all furnishing after inflation? Also, with large open structures, are there any design features to prevent "stranded zones" where a person on board could find themselves unable to reach any fixed furnishings to help them navigate and thus get stuck? (There's a minor example of this in Kibo)
Skylab had much larger interior space than the ISS, and no one ever got “stranded”. Swimming motions were and are adequate to propel one’s self with inertia. The Kibo issue was a silly comment from astronaut Mark Kelly who obviously is lacking in Skylab information.
As a "Space Travel Thinker" not a builder on any level at all, this would enable so many fascinating things.. in my mind, this is upscalable, I mean, is it possible to do this, in the size of small asteroids? (If there was enough funding, yes, but, in a mind, funding is not an issue) I know i have seen too many movies, but just thank you for contributing to our future. In "my world", we, all humans should unite and have one single focus. The Universe. With this i easily see Space Stations around Mars, Moon, Titan and all the other places. Go for it.
Glad to see BEAM has transformed in to LIFE, and looking forward to seeing more hardware launched and expanding the horizon of human exploration. These modules are also going to be great for fast assembled structures on various moons, sunk vertically like mini office buildings and apartments, easily covered with regolith for further protection from radiation. Question also - This test taking place in our atmosphere, with 14psi pushing in and NASA's requirement of 60psi pushing out, did the burst pressure exceed NASA's requirement for the Zero-psi environment of LEO ?
Sierra Space out here just delivering. 😲 Dreamchaser being close for an actual flight test AND now a full-scale test of new modules for a space station? Slow down, you're making other companies look bad 🤣🤣🤣 Actually, no. Please keep going. It's amazing to see you strife!
I am a little embarrassed to say this is the first I have heard of this company/operation and project. Very cool and can't wait to see where it all goes. Godspeed to the whole team and thanks for sharing. cheers.
Cave Johnson here . Right. Now, you might be asking yourself, 'Cave, just how difficult are these tests? What was in that phone book of a contract I signed? Can some bubbles wrap withstand the vacuum of space ? Will I be forced to test this ? Am I in danger?' Let me answer those questions with a question: Who wants to make sixty dollars? Cash
After just finishing all of the series “For All Mankind” this, along with all the other companies and projects happening, feels like we are on the precipice of another space race, and that is super exciting! So many amazing technologies and discoveries have come from developing for space travel and exploration that have already benefited society. I’m so excited to see what is to come. Congratulations on this amazing achievement!
super cool. Does nasa have a requirement for pressurised hold time? like keeping one of these airtight as long as possible?. than again, if the use case is only 25% of the achieved pressure I doubt much can go wrong long term.
How is radiation handled? I'm assuming that is harder than micrometeorites which likely requires layers. But do layers here match or surpass the usual radiation protection means?
Our space station technology is deigned for its environment and takes into consideration several factors including radiation. Specialized shielding is designed to be a part of the MMOD layering along with other materials that are internal to the Inner Mold Line (IML) of the softgoods systems. The LIFE habitat materials will go through a full spectrum of testing based on Design Reference Missions (DRM), this will include materials that have been selected for radiation protection.
So how common are micrometeorites around Earth?.. for that matter what about manmade debris in orbit?.. is there a self sealing ability.. so many questions
For those wondering, atmospheric pressure is around 15 psi. That thing that withstand much more pressure than you'd ever find in space station. I've always had the intuition that inflatables were going to be safer than rigid hulls but now I'm really convinced. Good job Sierra Space !
Looks like I'm the first to comment on your video. Congratulations on the milestones your team members are crossing. I hope you can do a video showing the milestones ahead and the next steps in your build process with Blue Origin for first module. Looking forward to another Dream Chaser update also!
Would it be interesting to have some kind of material that is initially gaseous but crystallizes as a solid structure once mixed with some reactive agent? Relying on high pressure valves, gases and maleable structures for long periods of time seems dodgy.
How well does it handle fire? Internal or External?. How flammable is it? Does heat reduce its strength? I realize it will probably only be nominally at ~14.5psi, but would fire be enough to compromise the whole structure. When it is deployed, will there be internal rigid beams installed? Both for making separate rooms/cabinets and for longitudinal rigidity?
Fire is difficult to sustain in zero-gee, and just turning off the air circulation fans is the quickest, safest way to stop a fire- it will greatly slow or even self-extinguish. The air-exposed layer air-barrier layer (#9) is probably a fire-resistant polymer, while the other layers aren't in contact with the atmosphere. As for longitudinal rigidity, the internal pressure at one bar provides an axial preload equal to about 450 to 500 tons of axial tension. You could swing a sledgehammer at the soft goods and it will just bounce off. Hit a basketball with a hammer to get a feel for it...
This is a realy good idea. Just one question. If a baloon is fully inflated, that means that the outside air and the inside air excert the same force. If this baloon goes up, then it explodes because on higher altitudes, there isn't enough air density outside to counteract the baloon, so the baloon expands to hit that same pressure, and because rubber isn't that good on streching too much, it bursts. If we did that in space, it would have been even worse, because even 1L air could expand as much as it liked. So how would you prevent the LIFE inflatable space station to burst?
Yet ANOTHER idiotic YT commenter that thinks a high tech envelope made of modern high strength materials is simply “the same as a thin mylar weather balloon”. Jesus, did you finish first grade?
The outer skin is flexible but not elastic (at least no where near like rubber) and has a rigid internal skeleton. This makes the structure more robust than a simple balloon, meaning that the vessel can withstand a far greater pressure differential before bursting. Other than using air pressure to retain its physical shape (rather than shaped metal or composites), the structure is little different in resilience to more familiar rigid structural components - even rigid tin cans can burst due to pressure if it’s strength fails. Additionally, most balloons (especially rubber based) are made more fragile and brittle due to the low temperatures at high altitude, this, combined with being extremely thin skinned (to reduce weight) and adverse effects to its chemical composition due to high radiation levels, mean they have a significantly reduced lifespan at altitude. Consequently, the balloons tend to burst even if they were rated for higher pressures ground level.
I'm nowhere near qualified to answer your question, but high altitudes are about pressure differences, not the actual pressures. So air pressure at sea level is 14.7 PSI. The module in this video burst at around 75 PSI, which is approx 5 times greater . I'm not sure what the pressure difference is when you "divide by zero" which I guess is what space atmosphere would be? Good question, I'm not sure what the actual pressure difference is in space, but I'm sure NASA knows and this module passed their threshold apparently.
The pressure differential is what's relevant. The external pressure in space is 0 PSI. At sea level, it's about 15 PSI. They tested it to at least 70 PSI of internal pressure (6:1 ratio). If you blow up a rubber balloon normally, the pressure inside the balloon is only a little bit above the atmospheric pressure right before it bursts.
Yeah. My thoughts. Temperature diffential, solar wind, micrometeorites. They should aim to launch demo module as soon as possible to be able to collect data for at least several months operation time.
Here is our Inflatable Space Station. So it's a balloon? No, it's an Inflatable Space Sta... yeah OK, it's a balloon. But more serious, looks nice. Hope they succeed.
ISS is already covered in textile blanket for years, as main protection from external forces. In addition all Bigelow test articles surpassed expectations, when it comes to structural integrity, and the one that is currently attached to ISS is used as storage unit, so it is not exactly handled as something fragile/unreliable. I believe Sierra can only fail on production of these inflatable modules, either if they get stuck on developing one off custom sizes for new vehicles, or fail to build/finance factory for one size, that fits into most commonly launched vehicles, and potentially neatly stack into heavy lift vehicles.
You might find it interesting to research the inflatable module that's been attached to ISS for years. It's used as extra storage while NASA has been observing its long term exposure performance. Inflatables are very cool. I'd be shocked if they don't play a huge part in future space stations for the amount of "cheaper to transport" internal volume.
Good job and cool idea. Lets see a track record over years. Also, the dig at SpaceX and Elon wasn't cool. I mean lets be honest, SpaceX will be the company getting you to space.
I am curious if the benefits outweigh the cons when ONE failure can compromise the entire structure whereas the current station could receive damage to a particular area, isolate the event, and begin repairs.
Aims worth chasing is a cute tagline. Obviously there are alot of very talented people on this project. I hope this can inspire people towards the green revolution we are long overdue to enter the next iteration of human progress.
Reliability and Sustaining 6:44 Group my hats off to you Guys!👍 As a guy who bearly graduated high school i had the pleasure of getting a job with Haliburton in Houston as a tech in Environmental Testing, Shock, Vibration, Halt and Hass, Pressure, Thermal , Qualification and Manufacturing!!! As one Engineer told me one Day" its not worst then work on some thing for months or years and its tested and "Fail " from that day on i had really True RESPECT for Engineering!!! P.S. was the vavles made in house or out side vendor???
To start, I'm not an expert on the subject or have I been able to test this in any scale or know if it would even work. That said, would it be possible to have a trapped viscus layer of a gel sealant that while under the pressure in the vacuum if space. Should a pin hole or other hole happen to the outer layer. The pressure on the inside of the chamber pushing against the walls evenly, push the gel sealant towards the hole. That as soon as it's exposed to the vacuum, has the compound that keeps the gel a gel flashes off. Freezing the gel into a hard polymer patch? Something like that green gel that's supposed to plug holes in tires here on Earth?
Man, that thing ruptures in a fascinating way! It makes me think about the difference between hoop stress and axial stress. What's interesting is that your cylinder is so short, that the two are similar. It's fascinating to me that it ruptured in the AXIAL direction!? (Hoop normally fails first) There's an interesting analysis waiting to happen here! My guess is that my orientation is off because your geometry is so interesting! Would love to discuss.
not so crazy to see you here destin! Btw love your videos and the effort you put into them!
Your channel is big enough you could probably cajole them into letting you do an in depth episode, maybe even some hypersonic light gas gun micrometeoroid impact test footage.
Right! I imagine a toroid would fail like this.
We would not mind if you happen to show up at their next test with a Phantom!
Is that the sound of a future video in the making sir?
valves, its always valves
You sound like my heart surgeon!😂😂😂😂
I was about to say the exact same thing 😂
S Tier comment
You should pass the word about valves to anybody trying to build a Hyperloop
"You ARE the weakest link. Goodbye."
I did a graduate level study on inflatable space structures about 30 years ago. While we knew it was feasible, the materials development still had a long way to go back then. It's good to see things are progressing. Developing these for Moon or Mars based habitats will be key.
Wow, that's pretty awesome. How do they keep the oxygen and carbon dioxide levels correct?
definitely compacting things as much as possible before launching is key. I love the idea of inflating, or unfolding, structures once in space (or on another body in the solar system). These processes will be quite valuable in developing the space infrastructure we will need to expand outward.
Can I ask you then? I thought the containers that makeup the ISS are made from metal for a reason, like radiation or floating debris. I know they have to use a shroud to cover the hatches from space dust, and we know an object the size of a bb can wipe out the station. So how's an inflatable going to be any safer?
I always ask the question when someone brings up the subject of leaving this planet…Why ? Why, when we have everything here that we need ! 😢 let’s work on/spend money on cleaning this planet up and ways of cleaning the emissions that we emit and in the meanwhile create habitable structures in case we can’t clean it all up and this planet becomes as uninhabitable as Mars and the moon that we are planing for ???
Doesn’t make a lot of sense imo
key to what?
only reason to go to mars is to get its resources which could be done remotely but is not very easy as the transport back is gonna be a pain.
living their is useless that place is way harsher to live than the worst place on earth is for the foreseeable future i could see benefit to testing in space cause of 0 gravity but i dont even see a reason to go to the moon and complicate things a 100fold. way easier to just stay in space and not have to worry about landing and launching of a different terrestrial body .
and instead of them then pouring those resources to develop a habitable habitat on those very harsh terrestrial body's compared to earth they could pour those resources in making this planet more livable again without us having to change alot in the way we live now .
seems alot easier to me as you barely have to travel and the circumstances here are way less harsh as there to begin with.
and living in a bubble is like living in a prison but of your own choice without any fresh air not really enticing if you ask me.
75 psi is pretty crazy. I used to work in the brew industry and you’d surely explode a stainless steel serving vessel at that pressure. Glad I never saw that at work because from the looks of that blow out I probably wouldn’t be around to tell the story.
Nah, 75psi isn't that much; it is a little over 5 atmospheres, the pressure of being 53m under water (not that deep). The yield strength of mild steel is 247MPa, UTS of 841 MPa. That is only 517kPa, nowhere near enough.
Yeah 75 is a freaking lot!
Though many times below what humans can survive.
@@joshbeaulieu7408 idk but isn't "a little over 5 atmospheres" a lot considering that in practice, this is supposed to withstand only like 1 atmosphere?
All I know is the pressure release valve was set at 30psi on those tanks. Id assume at 3 times that youd at least be starting to bow the container, not to mention the weight of liquid. I looked to see if one had ever exploded and couldn't find any compete ruptures due to over pressurisation so maybe they can hold much more. I know that safety was not the main concern when I worked at the brewery and its very easy to forget you have a tank being pressurized.@@ccllvn
what about high-speed space debris?
»Great question, we have performed MMOD Hypervelocity Impact (HVI) Testing with NASA, utilizing high power machines that can shoot a projectile at the rate or velocity of an impact in space. We hope to share more in the future as we continue testing.«
They've done testing with Nasa. See comments above
They go straight through, just like they would on the iss.
Did you watch the video? There are multiple Layers with the sole purpose of MMOD suppression.
I can't imagine aluminum is any better or this program wouldn't be feasible, it's the first thing anyone with any sense would question, I doubt they're just sweeping that under the rug though
Will there also be a test into how it behaves to orbital speed impacts?
I sure hope so
obviously. the best part is it not being rigid makes it easier to stop any projectiles.
Probably test better than the existing space station, not much can withstand an impact of debris moving 15,000-18,000mph.
Great question, we have performed MMOD Hypervelocity Impact (HVI) Testing with NASA, utilizing high power machines that can shoot a projectile at the rate or velocity of an impact in space. We hope to share more in the future as we continue testing.
good to know!@@SierraSpace
what I love about anything space related when it comes to advancement, is that it's one of the few field when if something "fails" people are cheering about it because at worse it just mean they have more data to continue.
Nah, it's just one of the fields where Elon Musk sticks his nose and convinces people his failures are actually successes.
People are cheering because it passed the test and then they pushed it to the limit, if it had failed prematurely then they probably wouldn’t be cheering.
well from what I understand it will only ever experience one to two atmospheres of pressure
so that's a pretty hefty safety margin
thing = BOOM
humans = YAAY
Basically a huge air suspension air bag. That's mighty impressive to withstand 75psi on that scale. A valve seal broke before the structure, that tells you something.
dont use chinese valves. or ones rated for use with water.
_These will work great in the future for real world horror movies!👾👾_
Congratulations on the successful test. When a puncture does occur (as it has on the iss) has it shown to be easier to patch than traditional rigid structures or more difficult? I am just curious of the methods of patching it overall this is a huge success and I know it's resistant to smaller impacts but obviously in time a puncture is inevitable.
Phil Swift has a solution for that
I imagine a layer of liquid that fills any leak instantly, does not have to be very thick just enough thickness to carry enough liquid under pressure to work. The first thing I though about thou was size and how the starship booster could send a very large deflated habitat on top of it. I wonder how big they could go.
It's interesting to note, though NASA wanted to pass roughly DOUBLE the pressure at atmospheric conditions at sea level (The same as on the space station) Sierra more than doubled that again, to almost 5 times what it would be used at. A wonderful test.
The reason NASA wants double is because when you put this into a vacuum, that's the equivalent pressure differential when the thing is deployed in orbit if they put it at full sea level pressure. But it's good to see it do better.
Exactly, considering the size & volume I was also surprised at how much air pressure they used.
So, in other words, it is over engineered and is wasteful on resources... and someone can do it cheaper.
Actually, 1 Atmosphere of Pressure is equal to 14.7 PSI so NASA's requirements are roughly 4 times the normal air pressure at sea level.
To be fair, it’s not a very high pressure. There’s higher pressure in your tap water at home.
Now THAT's a burst test! Congratulations Sierra!
Thank you!
I'm curious to see pressure tests with (intentionally)damaged article to test how much small impacts may change the overall structural integrity
Honestly, space junk seems like a showstopper for a real application for this, around Earth, at least, unless it can take several shots from a railgun, though, probably with lighter and less optimized projectiles than they're using now.
That was my this worry as well. Rigid space stations like the ISS have deflective plating to protect against debris strikes. What happens to this thing if it doesn't have shielding?
Not just impacts... how will a plastic balloon shield from solar radiation?
I was thinking once it's opened a solid hull could be added later, most likely a redundant protection I bet these guys could measure possibilities to an unfun level.
great question. This would be a super important metric
Honestly i wish that every field of science was still the way space development is, where the failures are praised as much as successes, and no matter what happens, they make sure to learn yet new facts and create even more advancements, looking forward, and not clinging to what has been done before
Why are you commenting this here? This wasn't a failure, it was supposed to blow up, they specifically tried to blow it up, it's called a "Burst Test" for a reason. This isn't like the SpaceX rocket blowing up when it wasn't supposed to.
And nowhere, science or not, does anyone praise failure as much as success, for obvious reasons.
this wasn't a failure, it was tested UNTIL failure. Huge difference. If it failed at 5 PSI it would have been a failure, but since it failed ABOVE the required standard, it was a success. Failures are not celebrated anywhere, but it doesn't mean that we can't focus on the positive and move forward.
It may have taken 10-15 launches to put this same volume in orbit but those ISS modules were full of amazing, useful stuff.
The ISS modules were not sent into space full of stuff. They were filled over the years by assembly and resupply missions.
Congratulations everyone on this fantastic test. I've been a huge fan of Sierra Space from the days when your ship was a human-rated design and similarly, a huge fan of Bigelow inflatables. It really will be a dream come true for me when you guys get to orbit (and back), successfully deploy a LIFE structure as part of a station and reintroduce the human-rated design. Very very excited!
Thank you so much for your support. Our team has a lot in store for 2024 and we look forward to sharing more as we continue to develop our space station technology.
@@SierraSpaceget some real material. 75psi is a joke
I love seeing this technology continue. Congrats to Shawn, Cody , and to the rest of the Sierra Space team.
Thanks Will!
thank you, anime profile pic.
I love the sheer volume. Plenty of room for laboratories and living quarters.
Interesting concept, I'm just wondering what happens when you'd have to repair a tear. I imagine you couldn't just sew it up with needle and thread or put a patch over it. With a metal hull you can just weld it closed, but I'm interested to hear about a solution in this context
This was awesome guys!-Huntsvillian here! Thanks for all the good booms! 💥
Gotta ask, do you guys consider the possibility that tiny space debris could puncture the hull or is there a protection system in place that helps this inflatable hab defend itself against them?
This is a scam program. It's not feasible. Dude said this thing was stronger than steel. This is a commercial
I'm sure they've thought about an armor system, they mentioned in a comment that they've been doing hypervelocity impact tests. Would love to know more. They can always strap on some armor after the fact, but it would be cool to have an inflatable solution to minimize the number of launches and set-up work. Armor doesn't have to be rigid! There are actually some benefits to inflatable armor, it can have lots of room and baffles inside to disperse the energy of the impact...
Believe it or not, they have in fact considered the most obvious, surface-level problems.
At 2:42 you can see that layers 3 through 7 are MMOD (micrometeorite orbital debris) layers, Whipple shields with far greater spacing than is possible in rigid hull designs. These will provide protection better than any existing space station or vehicle.
Search "Sierra Space LIFE meteoroid protection" and see the first result, it's by Sierra Space.
Also see @Chriss120 comment on this thread. Sierra Space responded, explaining the tests for this done with NASA.
75 PSI - or about 5x what you need in space? Seems like a good safety margin, although I'm not sure what pressure is usually maintained for space stations.
Our average operating pressure for Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and Deep Space is 14.7. For our Lunar Surface Habitat application, it will have a lower average operating pressure of 8 - 10 PSIG.
Does that mean a high O2 environment to maintain partial pressure of oxygen? I thought we'd stopped doing that since Apollo?@@SierraSpace
@@SierraSpace you should mention that thats for every square inch so 100s of thousands of pounds of pressure on the soft structure. Unless you dont want to scare people I guess. thats a pretty cool technology you got there.
This Is probably a stupid question, but, has anyone ever thought of filling these with water? Making a habitat, using the liquid resistance to the advantage of the human body!?!!
@@SierraSpaceGiven the abrasive nature of Lunar Regolith that it will be exposed to over time, is there additional shielding being designed for that habit or is it expected that the same technology can be safely used for Lunar applications without major redesign?
Great job. I'm equally impressed at the innovation being shown by Sierra Space here as I am by your willingness to openly share the back story and the results of this round of testing.
I never considered the difficulty of connecting a hard structure, securely and without leaks, to the expandable part of the habitat.
Thank you so much. We look forward to sharing more behind the scenes as we continue to develop the first commercial space station.
Sierra Space has been making huge progress on their hab. and I'm excited to see the first tested in space. Keep up the amazing work Sierra Space!
That was one of the coolest things I've seen tested until failure in a long time..... Keep up the great work guys. 😁👍
Those slow-mo shots were EPIC!!!!
Yea, they should have invited the slo mo guys.
The Slow-Mo Guys can do it better 😜
I am really looking forward to seeing a ton of these in orbit. I thought the idea might be DOA since Bigelow went out of business, but you guys are knocking it out of the park, awesome to see.
This is Nasa's IP, I believe. Bigellow was developing this technology under license. Now is Sierra's turn, picking up where Bigellow left.
Back in the 1960's, as best I recall, there was a design for an inflatable station on the cover of a Popular Science/Mechanics Illustrated type magazine. The design was a Von Braun style station with the ring for rotation to simulate gravity. My copy of the issue is, however, long lost. :(
Was it the December 1962 edition of Popular Science "Inside Our First Space Station"?
If you want to scale up your inflatables a torus is a better solution than a balloon.
Tensile strength of the material is the limiting factor and has to increase linear with the radius of the balloon.
In case of a torus - as long as the small radius can stand the interior pressure you can increase the big radius almost indefinitely.
The possibility of artificial gravity by rotation is a bonus.
For convenient reference, normal air pressure on the ISS is 101.3 kPa (14.7 psi); the same as at sea level on Earth.
cool but..
when pressurized surely it will fail when orbital debris hits it in space
cant see them working out a quick fix for that one
That's what that titan vessel engineers should have done: crush it to test it before using it on an actual mission.
You can’t crush test full size vehicles unless you have unlimited money. Models and known engineering principles would have worked just fine for Titan, the owner/builder simply decided to short cut safety to save time and money. Disaster is always the outcome.
Well, they were already informed several times by different experts both independant and on the team itself that the sub was unsuitable to go to those depths, but ignored them and decided to use the sub anyways. A crush test wouldn't have changed their mind, I don't think.
Or used a material that's strong in compression, unlike Carbon fiber.
Nah. Im sure its fine.
it's the wrong test because their problem was a material fatigue problem. they likely did the test to excess. called it good. she's never tested how many dives it could take (it got a recommended and they ignored it anyway)
Very impressive design to achieve rupture at 5x over sea level pressure! Congratulations to the entire team for a very successful full scale hardware test. Know that can be a heart pounding event when so much is riding on a concept demonstration!
I hope you can get a land-based version of this going. Something that could be plopped down on Mars or the Moon in a small diameter payload, and then deploy inside a lava tube or crater. Pile some regolith on top for protection from micrometeors, and it could be an incredibly good temporary base!
That, and they could make decent survival shelters, though I'm not sure 'inflatable bubbles' will ever be the MOST ideal out of any given set of solutions. But is there a link to a list of proposed applications for this?
Pile regalith? Why is it commenters have no concept of the strength of modern materials, totally flexible yet stronger than steel? Yikes.
We have more information available on our website, but we will be developing the systems and architecture for lunar, cislunar and deep space applications.
www.sierraspace.com/space-destinations/life-inflatable-space-habitat/
forget Mars, I want a one here on Earth for affordable inflatable housing.
@@SierraSpace Oh, that's so cool! Man, I'm so excited about your guys project. I think deployables is going to be the first step in any long-term space project.
After all, when you show up to a new area, you don't start by building a cabin. You start by pitching a few tents!
I imagine that something like what OP is proposing, will be integrated later on down the road, after it survives its current mission directive first. And the data from these installations in a decade will assist in habitats and other structures that will be needed when we do make landfall someday on another world. Or dimension. Or reality.
amazing but can it withstand space debris puncturing it?
Video starts at 5:18.
I've always enjoyed a good integrated blanking plate.
I'm curious as to how the interior components will be transported and installed. Or will they just be empty tubes?
It would be cool if the tubes carried the inflation material (air/nitrogen/etc.) save a huge amount of space
I believe a lot of the internal fit out equipment and materials can actually be stored within the core of the inflatable. Once the habitat is inflated, crew can enter the module and assemble the internal fit out using the materials stored within the core.
There is a steel center piece that most likely would carry the parts. They will have to ingeniously pack everything in and around it and unfold it when needed.
In pieces and / or other cargo trips I suspect as far as transport goes.
I believe the idea is usually to build a frame inside to hold equipment etc.
Seems to me like most everything will be mounted on the steel core scaffolding and the balloon inflated around it
I love to see this♥. Inflatable modules makes way more sense, than rigid body ones. I believe Sierra can only fail on production of these inflatable modules, either if they get stuck on developing one off custom sizes for new vehicles, or fail to build/finance factory for one size, that fits into most commonly launched vehicles, and potentially neatly stack into heavy lift vehicles.
Or nobody is buying. Many great ideas have fizzled out over the years because no matter how cool a concept might be - you need paying customers to succeed.
Rigid modules have the equipment, plumbing, windows, thrusters solar etc attached to the outer walls with the inner being the access way - very easy to configure on the ground.
Inflatables are kind of reversed the equipment has to be in the rigid core tube or configured after it is inflated.
If an inflatables is set up with the outside between the core and expanded walls -although the inflatable has more volume their utilisation of that volume is not as good.
In space radiation protection another issue the soft walls are probably good at slowing or stopping cosmic rays but not so good for EM radiation - i think hard modules have better options for reducing both as the equipment mounted to the outer walls adds more shielding - although soft modules could be configured this way after they are deployed in space that involves more difficulty than with a rigid design that is preconfigured.
Will be interesting to see how the inflatables go and how they compare with large rigid modules that will be possible with starship sized payload volumes.
Trouble is, Sierra can get far more capacity per launch loading onto New Glenn (7m diameter fairing) vs. commodity rockets and their 5.2m fairings. They didn’t partner with Blue Origin for nothing.
Do these plastic bubbles protect from solar radiation as well as a metallic shield?
I’d like to see them fashion the Inflatable Space Station in the shape of a Flamingo.
How are those not exploding without the 14 psi pressure we have on sea level?
Why test even more? Shouldn't the test be the exact opposite? "Space" is somewhere at 1x10-¹⁷torr.
The fact that it still went so high after being repressurized from the first try, shows it also is durable.
Also keeping in mind that there's exponential additional strain over one atmosphere, this test got to 5x, I'd find this more than safe for pressure.
Failure won't be anywhere as dramatic, without some massive external force. _(for those concerned by dramatic demonstration at 5 atmospheres)_
Patching leaks out in space shouldn't be a huge issue, it would be closer to the first test where the pressure went slowly.
Duct tape would be enough and add strength to any bulge or scratch. I'm sure there's some premade patches for any such issue as well.
_I'd like to see some toroid segments eventually, angling the ends is only a slight geometry change, because being able to get even a fraction of artificial gravity in a station would be a massive next project._
_I'm always looking to the future._
*slaps duct tape over hole*
"Mission control, problem solved"
*dramatic pose and arrogant smile*
Your point reminds me of the failed submersible. It worked for a bit...until it didn't.
Space does not exist, sorry NPC
If only humanity could actually work together, this type of achievement would occur daily. Bravo team, you guys will hopefully lead humanity to its next chapter.
Competition drives innovation. Cooperation drives complacency.
One of the most fundamental drives (if not the most) of any living organism--including humans--is reproduction. That means finding a mate which by default--again by natures design--is a competition. As long as humans are reproducing there will always be a limit to how much we can cooperate.
Thank you!
Super impressive work and company. These inflatable modules and the Dream Chaser sure ignites the imagination. Very excited to see it all implemented.
Thank you so much. We have a lot of exciting things happening in 2024 and we look forward to sharing.
We don't even have cameras on the moon of a 24hr live feed.
Love this stuff. So many brilliant people doing amazing things across the space industry. Well done on the test! Can't wait to see this kit go to space.
but its all about ppl on earth/"home" as he called it helping 8 billion ppl, no? but for some reason there is a mom/dad/kid waving at a spaceship growing food and seeming to be LIVING in it... why would they need to grow food and live in that if they weren't escaping something?
makes you wonder...
I was wondering how on earth are you supposed to put equipment in there with all the wirings and stuff? Os that solely for storage only?
The idea, according to their presentations, is to put all connections (electrical, life support, data lines) in the base of metal ring connector. All other equipment will be delivered, mount and connected via hub in metal ring after module installed on space station.
Wiring is flexible.
The idea is to provide space in a compact launch package and unfold the contents in orbit. Flatpack like IKEA.
I think storage and waste management in space has been an issue.
We launch the softgoods packed around a metallic core that houses all operationa systems. Once the habitat is in space, it is pressurized and expanded to its operational volume. The additional volume once expanded is populated via additional transport vehicles such as the Dream Chaser spaceplane.
Thank you for sharing this! I love seeing your updates. Sierra Space, Axiom Space, and SpaceX are the coolest soace companies out there - each industry leaders in their own rights.
Also, congratulations on the burst test. At what speed speed do you fill the article? The video makes it look fast, but do you fill, wait, fill, wait to make sure the article stays intact at predefined checkpoints?
@SierraSpace What are you expecting for operational lifespan and long-term maintenance/leak management and safety protocol?
Btw, excited to see what you'll get to try out with interior design on this one, are you picturing doing furnishing sort of like a popup trailer, or to do all furnishing after inflation?
Also, with large open structures, are there any design features to prevent "stranded zones" where a person on board could find themselves unable to reach any fixed furnishings to help them navigate and thus get stuck? (There's a minor example of this in Kibo)
Skylab had much larger interior space than the ISS, and no one ever got “stranded”. Swimming motions were and are adequate to propel one’s self with inertia. The Kibo issue was a silly comment from astronaut Mark Kelly who obviously is lacking in Skylab information.
As a "Space Travel Thinker" not a builder on any level at all, this would enable so many fascinating things.. in my mind, this is upscalable, I mean, is it possible to do this, in the size of small asteroids? (If there was enough funding, yes, but, in a mind, funding is not an issue)
I know i have seen too many movies, but just thank you for contributing to our future.
In "my world", we, all humans should unite and have one single focus.
The Universe.
With this i easily see Space Stations around Mars, Moon, Titan and all the other places. Go for it.
Okay, but : Will it blend?
Glad to see BEAM has transformed in to LIFE, and looking forward to seeing more hardware launched and expanding the horizon of human exploration. These modules are also going to be great for fast assembled structures on various moons, sunk vertically like mini office buildings and apartments, easily covered with regolith for further protection from radiation.
Question also - This test taking place in our atmosphere, with 14psi pushing in and NASA's requirement of 60psi pushing out, did the burst pressure exceed NASA's requirement for the Zero-psi environment of LEO ?
So a net 3 bar + success gives a 300% safety factor in space. Pretty good.
It's really honored to see the Ecowitt WH51 soil moisture sensor here (03:18).
Sierra Space out here just delivering. 😲
Dreamchaser being close for an actual flight test AND now a full-scale test of new modules for a space station?
Slow down, you're making other companies look bad 🤣🤣🤣
Actually, no. Please keep going. It's amazing to see you strife!
I am a little embarrassed to say this is the first I have heard of this company/operation and project. Very cool and can't wait to see where it all goes. Godspeed to the whole team and thanks for sharing. cheers.
Cave Johnson here . Right. Now, you might be asking yourself, 'Cave, just how difficult are these tests? What was in that phone book of a contract I signed? Can some bubbles wrap withstand the vacuum of space ? Will I be forced to test this ? Am I in danger?' Let me answer those questions with a question: Who wants to make sixty dollars? Cash
After just finishing all of the series “For All Mankind” this, along with all the other companies and projects happening, feels like we are on the precipice of another space race, and that is super exciting!
So many amazing technologies and discoveries have come from developing for space travel and exploration that have already benefited society. I’m so excited to see what is to come.
Congratulations on this amazing achievement!
If our ancestors cared to fix their human bs here on Earth first, we could have been traveling across the galaxy by now.
That show is so good, Perestroika as the season finale was so amazing
Most of my life there's been little growth in human spaceflight; it's very cool to see all the recent developments
super cool. Does nasa have a requirement for pressurised hold time? like keeping one of these airtight as long as possible?. than again, if the use case is only 25% of the achieved pressure I doubt much can go wrong long term.
How is radiation handled? I'm assuming that is harder than micrometeorites which likely requires layers. But do layers here match or surpass the usual radiation protection means?
Our space station technology is deigned for its environment and takes into consideration several factors including radiation. Specialized shielding is designed to be a part of the MMOD layering along with other materials that are internal to the Inner Mold Line (IML) of the softgoods systems. The LIFE habitat materials will go through a full spectrum of testing based on Design Reference Missions (DRM), this will include materials that have been selected for radiation protection.
Escape from Sulpicius Gallus M.
@@SierraSpace now shoot it with an extremely high powered rifle. A more realistic test.
So how common are micrometeorites around Earth?.. for that matter what about manmade debris in orbit?.. is there a self sealing ability.. so many questions
Could you Inject it with Resin or some cureable polymer once its fully inflated ? Will resin even cure in space ? 😅
For those wondering, atmospheric pressure is around 15 psi. That thing that withstand much more pressure than you'd ever find in space station. I've always had the intuition that inflatables were going to be safer than rigid hulls but now I'm really convinced. Good job Sierra Space !
Until little rock makes it go pop😮
With SpaceX and their Starship this technology can be very useful. Hopefully they are going to team up!
Go team earth!
come to think about it would be a good replacement for the feul tanks on starship and they are colapsable. would solve the feul slushing issue
Imagine the Bluloon you could fit in starship! Inflating warehouse😂
great job sierra space. also cant wait to see the dream chaser fly
It broke my heart to see Bigelow go under during the pandemic. I'm glad to see someone is working in this space
That was fun to watch the "life" structure burst. Best to know now what the limits are while they are on land, then when in space. Well done.
Congrats, Sierra Space.🙂
Congratulations Sierra Space!
Looks like I'm the first to comment on your video.
Congratulations on the milestones your team members are crossing.
I hope you can do a video showing the milestones ahead and the next steps in your build process with Blue Origin for first module.
Looking forward to another Dream Chaser update also!
2:00 Props to those two guys who had to stay inside it while it burst... true heroes of science
Would it be interesting to have some kind of material that is initially gaseous but crystallizes as a solid structure once mixed with some reactive agent? Relying on high pressure valves, gases and maleable structures for long periods of time seems dodgy.
How well does it handle fire? Internal or External?. How flammable is it? Does heat reduce its strength? I realize it will probably only be nominally at ~14.5psi, but would fire be enough to compromise the whole structure. When it is deployed, will there be internal rigid beams installed? Both for making separate rooms/cabinets and for longitudinal rigidity?
Fire is difficult to sustain in zero-gee, and just turning off the air circulation fans is the quickest, safest way to stop a fire- it will greatly slow or even self-extinguish. The air-exposed layer air-barrier layer (#9) is probably a fire-resistant polymer, while the other layers aren't in contact with the atmosphere.
As for longitudinal rigidity, the internal pressure at one bar provides an axial preload equal to about 450 to 500 tons of axial tension. You could swing a sledgehammer at the soft goods and it will just bounce off. Hit a basketball with a hammer to get a feel for it...
This is a realy good idea. Just one question. If a baloon is fully inflated, that means that the outside air and the inside air excert the same force. If this baloon goes up, then it explodes because on higher altitudes, there isn't enough air density outside to counteract the baloon, so the baloon expands to hit that same pressure, and because rubber isn't that good on streching too much, it bursts. If we did that in space, it would have been even worse, because even 1L air could expand as much as it liked. So how would you prevent the LIFE inflatable space station to burst?
Yet ANOTHER idiotic YT commenter that thinks a high tech envelope made of modern high strength materials is simply “the same as a thin mylar weather balloon”. Jesus, did you finish first grade?
The difference between space and sea level is only one atmosphere. ~15psi.
The outer skin is flexible but not elastic (at least no where near like rubber) and has a rigid internal skeleton. This makes the structure more robust than a simple balloon, meaning that the vessel can withstand a far greater pressure differential before bursting.
Other than using air pressure to retain its physical shape (rather than shaped metal or composites), the structure is little different in resilience to more familiar rigid structural components - even rigid tin cans can burst due to pressure if it’s strength fails.
Additionally, most balloons (especially rubber based) are made more fragile and brittle due to the low temperatures at high altitude, this, combined with being extremely thin skinned (to reduce weight) and adverse effects to its chemical composition due to high radiation levels, mean they have a significantly reduced lifespan at altitude. Consequently, the balloons tend to burst even if they were rated for higher pressures ground level.
I'm nowhere near qualified to answer your question, but high altitudes are about pressure differences, not the actual pressures. So air pressure at sea level is 14.7 PSI. The module in this video burst at around 75 PSI, which is approx 5 times greater . I'm not sure what the pressure difference is when you "divide by zero" which I guess is what space atmosphere would be? Good question, I'm not sure what the actual pressure difference is in space, but I'm sure NASA knows and this module passed their threshold apparently.
The pressure differential is what's relevant. The external pressure in space is 0 PSI. At sea level, it's about 15 PSI. They tested it to at least 70 PSI of internal pressure (6:1 ratio).
If you blow up a rubber balloon normally, the pressure inside the balloon is only a little bit above the atmospheric pressure right before it bursts.
Let's hope that the extreme space weather, including harsh UV and other radiation, doesn't degrade the material they've used.
Yeah. My thoughts. Temperature diffential, solar wind, micrometeorites. They should aim to launch demo module as soon as possible to be able to collect data for at least several months operation time.
It will.
Here is our Inflatable Space Station.
So it's a balloon?
No, it's an Inflatable Space Sta... yeah OK, it's a balloon.
But more serious, looks nice. Hope they succeed.
ISS is already covered in textile blanket for years, as main protection from external forces. In addition all Bigelow test articles surpassed expectations, when it comes to structural integrity, and the one that is currently attached to ISS is used as storage unit, so it is not exactly handled as something fragile/unreliable. I believe Sierra can only fail on production of these inflatable modules, either if they get stuck on developing one off custom sizes for new vehicles, or fail to build/finance factory for one size, that fits into most commonly launched vehicles, and potentially neatly stack into heavy lift vehicles.
Thank you! This whole video, all I was thinking was, "What about the radiation?"
Would be epic if yall do a constant live stream of it just sitting there at that pressure for a year
Those plates on the side were BOOKIN it. Holy that's some force behind that!
SpaceX surprised me with new fuel and reusable rockets. But I gotta say, inflatable habitats was not on my 2024 bingo card.
You might find it interesting to research the inflatable module that's been attached to ISS for years. It's used as extra storage while NASA has been observing its long term exposure performance. Inflatables are very cool. I'd be shocked if they don't play a huge part in future space stations for the amount of "cheaper to transport" internal volume.
Good job and cool idea. Lets see a track record over years. Also, the dig at SpaceX and Elon wasn't cool. I mean lets be honest, SpaceX will be the company getting you to space.
Sierra has partnered with Blue Origin and its New Glenn rocket on this project.
Yes!!💥
That was awesome!
Where can I find an application?! I want to work there!
how does compartmentlization work once inflated? what happens in the event of a puncture from debris?
That is such a cool thing that y'all are doing. Love you explanations and your low speed video footage. Good work y'all.
They did a great job, I have conducted many burst tests with party balloon structures
Congratulations, Sierra Space! 💪🏼💪🏼
That burst was AMAZING!
I always thought this would be a good idea. Glad to see real progress being made!
What was the road like to get to this stage? How many stages from concept to full scale were there?
That was the most interesting video of something breaking apart I’ve ever seen.
how does it performs when hit by a small object traveling at mach 30 ?
Glad to see this was shot well.. So many people cheaping out on good lighting nowadays.. Cudos to the production company
I am curious if the benefits outweigh the cons when ONE failure can compromise the entire structure whereas the current station could receive damage to a particular area, isolate the event, and begin repairs.
I applaud you, amazing work!
THIS is the most exciting thing about future of Space, amazing work!
I designed one 30 years ago in junior college. You need to fill the walls with expanding foam insulation. Then you'll have aomething. 😜
The SpaceX of space habitats... I love it! Can't wait to see what you guys bring to orbit!
Aims worth chasing is a cute tagline. Obviously there are alot of very talented people on this project. I hope this can inspire people towards the green revolution we are long overdue to enter the next iteration of human progress.
If this betters people and gets me closer to living in space I'm here for it!
What about interiors and equipment would that not take extra launches to fit the unit out?
cant wait for newer and better iterations of this to come out
Reliability and Sustaining 6:44 Group my hats off to you Guys!👍 As a guy who bearly graduated high school i had the pleasure of getting a job with Haliburton in Houston as a tech in Environmental Testing, Shock, Vibration, Halt and Hass, Pressure, Thermal , Qualification and Manufacturing!!! As one Engineer told me one Day" its not worst then work on some thing for months or years and its tested and "Fail " from that day on i had really True RESPECT for Engineering!!! P.S. was the vavles made in house or out side vendor???
Make the solar panels that way?
Great Work ! Can't wait to see them in space!
To start, I'm not an expert on the subject or have I been able to test this in any scale or know if it would even work.
That said, would it be possible to have a trapped viscus layer of a gel sealant that while under the pressure in the vacuum if space. Should a pin hole or other hole happen to the outer layer. The pressure on the inside of the chamber pushing against the walls evenly, push the gel sealant towards the hole. That as soon as it's exposed to the vacuum, has the compound that keeps the gel a gel flashes off. Freezing the gel into a hard polymer patch? Something like that green gel that's supposed to plug holes in tires here on Earth?