ESA Document - Emits - ESA
ESA Document - Emits - ESA ESA Document - Emits - ESA
s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-20(A) February 2004 page 160 of 422 A greenhouse has not been introduced at this stage of the study. The study team is aware of the positive impact of the greenhouse on the different functions of a LSS, the nutrition of the crew and on the crew psychology. On the basis of preliminary knowledge, a greenhouse would provide:: • A high degree of closure of carbon dioxide to oxygen conversion • A high degree of water loop closure • A high percentage of fresh food to the crew However, it would cause an increase in structural mass and power requirements that perhaps offset the gain of mass on the LSS. Therefore, at this stage of the study and the incomplete tradeoff between LSS with greenhouse and LSS without greenhouse, the greenhouse was not considered. 3.3.2.3 Waste management strategy The long duration of this mission inherently involves the production of substantial amounts of both organic and inorganic solid waste. This amount adds up to several tonness and has to be taken into account and dealt with in an efficient way. Several options were considered for waste management. It was decided to jettison the generated solid waste using existing airlocks to minimise the mass penalties of the mission. However, some treatment and storage is still necessary before jettisoning. This treatment depends on the nature of the waste and can be described as follows. Waste treatment strategy The handling of the inorganic waste (i.e. cleaning supplies, hygiene supplies, waste collection supplies, etc) is somewhat easier than for organic waste as it does not require because much treatment. Care must be taken in correctly classifying the nature of the waste. Supplies classified as inorganic upon launch become organic waste upon use by the crew. The first step in the management of the inorganic waste would be to compact it to reduce its volume. Mass reduction is possible by reducing the waste reusable solid, gaseous and liquid compounds. After compaction, decontamination and bioresistant storage would be sufficient to have the inorganic waste safely stored before jettisoning. The management of the organic waste (i.e. used tissues, faecal material, hair and skin material, nail clippings, food leftovers, etc) is more complicated and it requires waste stabilization. Three main technologies could be used for this purpose: chemical stabilization, sterilization or lyophilization (commonly referred to as freeze drying). Mass and power considerations, and assessing their technology readiness level, lyophilization looks most promising for the reduction of the organic waste. Lyophilization is the process of removing water from a product by sublimation and desorption. It is performed in lyophilization equipment which consists of a drying chamber with temperature controlled shelves, a condenser to trap water removed from the product, a cooling system to supply refrigerant to the shelves and condenser, and a vacuum system to reduce the pressure in the chamber and condenser to facilitate the drying process. Lyophilizers come in a wide variety of sizes and configurations and can be equipped with options that allow system controls to range from fully manual to completely automated. Lyophilization cycles consist of three phases:
s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-20(A) February 2004 page 161 of 422 Freezing, primary drying, and secondary drying. Conditions in the dryer are varied through the cycle to ensure that the resulting product has the desired physical and chemical properties, and that the required stability is achieved. This freeze drying technique allows recovery of water, which could be fed to the water recycling system, while inactivating and compacting the remaining solid waste. This treated waste needs to be stored in airtight bags to avoid its humidification and recontamination to be then jettisoned together with the compacted and treated inorganic waste according to the strategy explained hereafter. Figure 3-30 summarizes’ the waste management strategy selected for this mission: Treatment: Lyophilization Airtight Storage Jettison Gaseous Waste Organic Solid Waste Waste Solid Waste Resource Recovery Inorganic Solid Waste Liquid Waste Treatment: Decontamination Bioresistant Storage Jettison Figure 3-30: Waste strategy The MELiSSA cycle could provide an alternative way of treating organic waste. However, its maturity is currently not advanced enough to be considered in this study. 3.3.2.3.1 Jettisoning strategy For the proposed waste management strategy to have an optimal beneficial impact on the mission performances, the stored waste should be jettisoned at strategic mission phases; this is, before any major ∆v manoeuvres to reduce the mass that needs to be accelerated or decelerated. Having this in mind, two waste discarding operations are envisioned: • The first jettisoning would occur prior to the Mars Orbit Insertion manoeuvres and it would discard around 1210 kg of solid waste stored during the 217 days of the transfer to Mars phase. • The second discarding operation would be to transfer the waste stored during the 533 days orbiting around Mars to the MAV after it has docked with the THM and before it is undocked. • The waste accumulated in this phase is calculated to be about 2890 kg, which after treatment and compaction can be stored in the MAV’s cabin. • Finally, the 1170 kg of waste stored during the 210 days of transfer to Earth can remain in the THM and would be discarded with it. Compliant with the Planetary Protection rules, it is necessary to ensure that none of the jettisoned waste units would reach the surface of Mars or Earth.
- Page 109 and 110: s 2.10.1.4 Communications HMM Asses
- Page 111 and 112: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 113 and 114: s 2.10.2.2.2 LEO assembly HMM Asses
- Page 115 and 116: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 117 and 118: s Basic RF link Four 70-m Ka-band s
- Page 119 and 120: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 121 and 122: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 123 and 124: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 125 and 126: s 3 TRANSFER VEHICLE 3.1 Systems…
- Page 127 and 128: s Operational Requirements It shall
- Page 129 and 130: s Trans Mars Injection Module Mars
- Page 131 and 132: s Figure 3-2: Parallel configuratio
- Page 133 and 134: s Figure 3-6: Global dimensions com
- Page 135 and 136: s Front Node 3.2.3.1.3 EVA systems
- Page 137 and 138: s Trans Mars Injection (three stage
- Page 139 and 140: s Figure 3-16: Recommendations for
- Page 141 and 142: s Factors to be considered Impacts
- Page 143 and 144: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 145 and 146: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 147 and 148: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 149 and 150: s Figure 3-24: Baseline design back
- Page 151 and 152: s Figure 3-26: Baseline design priv
- Page 153 and 154: s Module part 3............= 0 m 3
- Page 155 and 156: s 3.3.2.1 Requirements and design d
- Page 157 and 158: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 159: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 163 and 164: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 165 and 166: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 167 and 168: s 3.3.3.1 Requirements and design d
- Page 169 and 170: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 171 and 172: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 173 and 174: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 175 and 176: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 177 and 178: s flux [W/m2] 250 200 150 100 50 0
- Page 179 and 180: s Figure 3-38: Power required to ma
- Page 181 and 182: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 183 and 184: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 185 and 186: s 3.3.4.3 Assumptions and trade-off
- Page 187 and 188: s 3.3.4.3.3 Power conditioning and
- Page 189 and 190: s 3.3.5 AOCS HMM Assessment Study R
- Page 191 and 192: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 193 and 194: s Configuration Length (m) Total ma
- Page 195 and 196: s 3.3.5.5 ACS for TMI 1 st HMM Asse
- Page 197 and 198: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 199 and 200: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 201 and 202: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 203 and 204: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 205 and 206: s 3.3.6.2 Baseline design HMM Asses
- Page 207 and 208: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 209 and 210: s 5 Reduce 2dB pointing precision t
s<br />
HMM<br />
Assessment Study<br />
Report: CDF-20(A)<br />
February 2004<br />
page 161 of 422<br />
Freezing, primary drying, and secondary drying. Conditions in the dryer are varied through the<br />
cycle to ensure that the resulting product has the desired physical and chemical properties, and<br />
that the required stability is achieved. This freeze drying technique allows recovery of water,<br />
which could be fed to the water recycling system, while inactivating and compacting the<br />
remaining solid waste. This treated waste needs to be stored in airtight bags to avoid its<br />
humidification and recontamination to be then jettisoned together with the compacted and treated<br />
inorganic waste according to the strategy explained hereafter. Figure 3-30 summarizes’ the waste<br />
management strategy selected for this mission:<br />
Treatment:<br />
Lyophilization<br />
Airtight Storage<br />
Jettison<br />
Gaseous<br />
Waste<br />
Organic<br />
Solid<br />
Waste<br />
Waste<br />
Solid<br />
Waste<br />
Resource<br />
Recovery<br />
Inorganic<br />
Solid<br />
Waste<br />
Liquid<br />
Waste<br />
Treatment:<br />
Decontamination<br />
Bioresistant Storage<br />
Jettison<br />
Figure 3-30: Waste strategy<br />
The MELiSSA cycle could provide an alternative way of treating organic waste. However, its<br />
maturity is currently not advanced enough to be considered in this study.<br />
3.3.2.3.1 Jettisoning strategy<br />
For the proposed waste management strategy to have an optimal beneficial impact on the<br />
mission performances, the stored waste should be jettisoned at strategic mission phases; this is,<br />
before any major ∆v manoeuvres to reduce the mass that needs to be accelerated or decelerated.<br />
Having this in mind, two waste discarding operations are envisioned:<br />
• The first jettisoning would occur prior to the Mars Orbit Insertion manoeuvres and it<br />
would discard around 1210 kg of solid waste stored during the 217 days of the<br />
transfer to Mars phase.<br />
• The second discarding operation would be to transfer the waste stored during the 533<br />
days orbiting around Mars to the MAV after it has docked with the THM and before<br />
it is undocked.<br />
• The waste accumulated in this phase is calculated to be about 2890 kg, which after<br />
treatment and compaction can be stored in the MAV’s cabin.<br />
• Finally, the 1170 kg of waste stored during the 210 days of transfer to Earth can<br />
remain in the THM and would be discarded with it.<br />
Compliant with the Planetary Protection rules, it is necessary to ensure that none of the jettisoned<br />
waste units would reach the surface of Mars or Earth.