The first Next-Generation Suborbital Researchers Conference just concluded in Boulder, Colorado with a larger-than-anticipated turnout (250) including movers and shakers from NASA, the commercial launch industry, and the scientific community. The Conference was an interesting mix of programmatic presentations from NASA, which has proposed $15 million/year for research missions on commercial suborbital vehicles (think SpaceShipTwo from Virgin Galactic, or New Shepard from Blue Origin), presentations from the many companies involved in the commercial launch sector, and an eclectic mix of scientists and educators looking for ways to utilize this new capability to reach the lower bounds of space. By all accounts, including mine, the meeting was a resounding success. Which of course just raises the expectations for next year’s conference which is being organized by - wait a minute, this can’t be right: by me! So mark your calendars for February 28 - March 2, 2011, on the main UCF campus in Orlando for the second go-round. By then, commercial suborbital vehicles may be flying to space.
Archive for the ‘Science - General’ Category
Suborbital Researchers Conference
Sunday, February 21st, 2010Astronaut Training Day 2 - Centrifuge Flights
Saturday, January 16th, 2010Day 2 was all about the Phoenix centrifuge at NASTAR. After some instruction on techniques to increase blood pressure to avoid loss of vision and black out, we did a series of four flights in the morning. Because the centrifuge only accommodates one person at a time, and because there were a dozen of us, it took a while for everyone to get a ride. I was fifth to go. The four flights consisted of brief profiles of sustained acceleration along either the body’s plus X axis (into the chest) or the plus Z axis (down the spine). The latter pose problems for consciousness because +Gz makes it harder for the heart to pump blood to the brain. The Gx flights make it difficult to breathe, but are not generally likely to make one pass out, at least for the durations we were doing (about 20 seconds at a time).
I have previously had experience with two G’s on parabolic airplane flights. The first time I flew one of those flights, I oriented my body so that the two G’s were in the +z direction, and I got very sick after about a half dozen parabolas. On subsequent flights I lay flat on the floor of the plane, making those G’s in the +x direction and therefore much easier to bear. So I was concerned about our 2 Gz and 3.5 Gz flights, though they wouldn’t have the repetition of the “vomit comet” nor would they be interspersed with 0 G parabolas. On the 3.5 Gz flight I had to apply all of the body-tensing countermeasures we used because I started to get a bit of tunnel vision. The countermeasures worked. The Gx flights, at 3 and 6 G’s, were impressive. The sensation of going up very very fast was completely convincing. At 6 Gx it was a real effort to breathe, and speech was very difficult. All in all, the flights were smooth and didn’t make me sick.
In the afternoon we did two flights simulating the acceleration profile of Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo. One was at 50% of the total acceleration, and the other was full acceleration. These profiles involved both Gx and Gz at the same time, along with a visual simulation of what we would see through the window of the spaceship. These flights really gave the impression of going somewhere FAST. On the final run, I had to apply countermeasures to keep my vision as things started to go gray during the 3.8 Gz portion of the rocket burn. The peak accelerations are actually on re-entry, but they are Gx and so are easier to deal with.
Astronaut Training Day 1 - Altitude Chamber
Wednesday, January 13th, 2010Today we got a tour of the NASTAR center which has some impressive aircraft simulators and a gigantic centrifuge (11 ton, 25-foot arm, with bolts going 45 feet down into the bedrock and a huge mass of concrete underneath to keep it stable as it swings around). Then we had a course on the physiology of hypoxia (oxygen deprivation) and some basics on atmospheric physics before getting fitted with oxygen masks and heading for the altitude chamber. I’m not actually sure that’s the write term, but it’s a room with a dozen seats and ports for oxygen masks and can have its pressure adjusted to simulate various altitudes.
After 30 minutes of denitrogenation (breathing pure oxygen to remove nitrogen bubbles from the blood to reduce the likelihood of those bubbles expanding to painful size on ascent to high altitudes), we took our masks off and they took the chamber up to 18,000 feet. That is to say, they lowered the pressure in the room to what it is at an altitude of 18,000 feet. At that altitude, the pressure is about half what it is at sea level. So each breath delivers half the oxygen of a breath at sea level. We had some simple exercises to perform - simple math operations, some writing - to identify any degradation in mental function as we entered a hypoxic state. I noticed an increased heart rate, but no other symptoms. I have done two altitude “flights” in the past, about 10 years ago, with no noticeable effects. I could not tell if the increased heart rate was due to lack of oxygen or simple anxiety about possibly worse effects. After about 15 minutes, one member of our group passed out. By that time I was feeling a bit tired, but otherwise no overt effects of hypoxia. My simple math problems were done without error, as were the two mazes.
Suborbital Astronaut Training at NASTAR - Day 0
Tuesday, January 12th, 2010Today I flew to Philadelphia with my graduate student, Akbar Whizin, in preparation for a two-day course on suborbital spaceflight at the NASTAR center. With at least two companies readying commercial suborbital rockets to carry paying passengers to the lower limits of outer space, there is increased interest in the uses of these vehicles for science and education and not just high-priced sightseeing. NASA has long had a vigorous program of experimentation in suborbital sounding rockets. These new vehicles may soon find a place as laboratories for scientists and students who need quick and easy access to either the upper reaches of the atmosphere or a few precious minutes of high quality microgravity.
My own scientific interest in these vehicles lies in the study of the collisional behavior of small objects and aggregates of objects at low impact speeds. I’ve had one such experiment fly twice on the space shuttle and a similar experiment has flown several times on parabolic airplane flights. These experiments simulate in various ways the collisions that were common in the early stages of the formation of the solar system and are currently taking place in Saturn’s rings (and the rings of the other planets). It is not possible to perform experiments on these kinds of collisions without a microgravity environment. A few seconds of microgravity can be achieved in a drop tower, and 10-15 seconds of a relatively uneven low-gravity environment can be obtained on parabolic airplane flights. For many experiments a longer, more stable microgravity environment is needed.
Virgin Galactic has unveiled the first of its passenger-carrying suborbital crafts, the VSS Enterprise. Blue Origin has selected my experiment and two others to fly on a test flight of their New Shepard suborbital rocket. Other companies are developing rockets for passengers and some just for payloads. Someday soon, scientists may be flying alongside their experiments on these rockets, reacting to the performance and making real time adjustments to the operation of the experiment. And so I find myself getting ready to undergo two days of “astronaut boot camp” at the NASTAR center. Tomorrow features some hypoxia training and time in a chamber simulating high altitudes (low atmospheric pressure). Wednesday will be a full simulation of a flight on the VSS Enterprise. The final frontier awaits.
An Imagined Conversation with a Moon Conspiracist
Tuesday, July 21st, 2009With the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11 I have heard more than I care about the delusional segment of the public that insists we did not go to the Moon. Only for my peace of mind, I have imagined a conversation with a Moon landing conspiracist where I ask him if he believes people have been to Antarctica. (My satisfaction in this imaginary conversation depends on him saying “yes,” but the beauty of me imagining this conversation is that I do, in fact, get to decide what the other person says.) So he says “Yes, of course!” to which I reply, “Why?”. Well, you can imagine the responses to this as well as I can, because presumably you also believe people have been to Antarctica, and unless you have personally been there yourself (and I know some of you have), all your reasons for believing people have been to Antarctica are the same as the reasons for believing people have been to the Moon: we have seen pictures of people there; we have talked to people who have been there; we have seen things that were brought back from there; we have seen the machines that take people there. Qualitatively, (unless, again, you have been there yourself), there is no difference in the evidence for people going to the Moon and the evidence for people going to Antarctica. My imaginary debater can then only fall back on the idea that going to the Moon is implausibly hard, to which I wonder if he believes that I can store thousands of books, pictures, songs, and movies on a device the size of a matchbook and why he thinks that is easier that sending a rocket to the Moon. In my imagination, my foe is crushed on the withering force of my logic. In reality, of course, there is just no arguing with some people.
A Different Way of Looking at “Weightlessness”
Sunday, January 25th, 2009I’ve had the mixed pleasure of spending a fair amount of time experiencing what is usually called “weightlessness”. I say it is a mixed pleasure because while the sensation of weightlessness is amazing and so different from our everyday experience of the world, I have experienced it on parabolic airplane flights which have the unhappy side effect in a segment of the population of inducing nausea and vomiting. I am in that unlucky segment. The body does adapt, and my last flight was puke-free. Other names used to describe the state of weightlessness are zero-g, no gravity, microgravity, and freefall. The latter is the only one that is truly accurate.
As an astronomer, gravity is the force that most concerns me professionally, and it is also the force that most of us have the most direct intuitive relationship with in our daily lives. And yet the relationship between gravity and freefall or “weightlessness” seems to be as elusive to most people as the sensation itself. Whether I am lecturing to a university astronomy class, speaking to a group of elementary school kids, or giving a public lecture to educated professionals, I always try to demonstrate the amazing insight of Isaac Newton about gravity: the same force that makes the Moon orbit the Earth is responsible for apples falling to the ground. While it is easy to understand those words, their implications for how the solar system works and for “weightlessness” usually remain abstract or obscure. Working against us is not just our daily experience (and, one could reasonably argue, millions of years of evolution), but also the language we use to describe gravity and its presumed absence.
Here is my standard gravity stump speech. For these purposes we do not need to stray into the exotic terrain of warped space-time and Einstein’s general relativity. Our sensation of gravity here on planet Earth comes not from the force of gravity exerted on us by the Earth, but by the competition between that force and all the stuff that gets in the way of it. If you are sitting now, you feel your weight because the chair is stopping you from falling to the floor. The actual sensation of weight I feel right now is due to pressure of a chair seat against the backs of my legs, the pressure of the floor against the bottom of my feet, and the pressure throughout my body produced by the weight of head on neck, torso on lower back, and so forth. So there are two ways to get rid of that pressure: get rid of the Earth, or get rid of the chair. If the chair beneath you were instantly snatched away, you would fall to the floor. And in that split second you would not feel the pressure of the chair on your backside. That sensation of weight would be gone, even though the Earth’s gravity is still very much present.
How about the weight of your head on your neck, etc? Galileo’s famous experiment at the tower of Pisa gives us the answer. Here again, though we may be familiar with the facts of the experiment, the implications are difficult to internalize: gravity makes everything fall at the same speed, whether it be a feather or a hammer, a head or a body. We (and centuries of thinkers between Aristotle and Galileo) have a hard time with this because air does a better job of slowing a feather than it does of slowing a hammer, so, in fact, the feather does fall slower. But if you get rid of the air (easy enough in a small lab experiment), they all fall at exactly the same rate. So when that chair is snatched away, all parts of your body will fall toward the floor at exactly the same rate. There will be no pressure of any part pushing up against any other part. And since that pressure is what we experience as weight, its absence gives us, in that brief period before slamming into the floor, “weightlessness.”
And yet we are still experiencing the Earth’s gravitational pull. In fact, in physics the term “weight” refers not to the pressure we feel from the chair, but simply the force of gravity acting on an object. Removing the chair does nothing to alter that force. It removes instead what is called the “normal force” of the chair that exactly cancels the force of gravity acting on our bodies. The rigid structure of the chair exerts an upward force on our bodies that keeps us from moving down due to the force of gravity. One might then consider the sensation we experience when the chair disappears not to be weightlessness, but normallessness.
I don’t think that will catch on.
We usually associate “weightlessness” with the image of astronauts “floating” inside a spaceship. This gives the impression of motionlessness (I’m going to see how many words I can add “lessness” to). However, it is the very large motion of these astronauts that makes them “weightless”. They are in a spaceship that is falling toward the Earth. There is no chair holding it up. And because the spaceship and the astronaut (like the hammer and the feather) fall toward the Earth at the same rate, the astronaut does not move relative to the spaceship. She appears to float inside it, yet there is nothing holding her up. Both she and the spaceship are falling freely toward the center of the Earth. Happily, they will not hit the Earth because previously, rockets accelerated the spaceship to such a high speed that by the time it has fallen the distance needed to hit the Earth, it has zipped over so much of the Earth that the curvature of the Earth has made the surface that much further away from the spaceship again. Here, then, is the similarity between the apple and the Moon that Newton recognized: the Moon is falling toward the Earth, but because of its great speed, it keeps missing the Earth.
So the only connection between space (as in “outer space”) and weightlessness is that getting above the atmosphere is the easiest way to fall for a very long time without running into something. But the exact same thing happens (for a very short time) when you snatch the chair out from under someone. So, “weightlessness” can be achieved by finding a way to fall for an extended period of time without any slowing due to air friction or, preferably, uncomfortably hard landings. Parabolic airplane flights accomplish this by flying the same path that an object falling toward the Earth would follow if there were no atmosphere. Because this is easily calculated, pilots can fly planes on such paths. While they do so, everything inside the plane follows the path than an object falling toward the Earth would follow if there were no atmosphere. So the airplane seat is falling as fast as you are, and it therefore doesn’t push up on you. Your arms are falling as fast as your shoulders, so they do not pull down on you either. You experience “weightlessness” because you are falling freely very quickly. The pilots make sure to achieve crashlessness (okay, that’s a stretch) on the flight by having the plane pull up before it heads toward the Earth too quickly. When it does, your body wants to head toward the Earth quickly, but the plane is rudely interrupting that fall and exerts a pressure against you that is much greater than normal. We thus feel heavy or excessive weight.
In fact, you are, when “weightless” accelerating at 1-g, where g is 9.8 meters per second per second. Right now, sitting on a chair in a normal terrestrial environment, your acceleration is zero-g. Weightlessness is really motion at 1-g, and not zero-g. The net force acting on us when we feel heavy is zero, while the net force acting on us when we feel weightless is equal to the local force due to gravity.
Fly Me to the Lower Edge of Space
Wednesday, December 17th, 2008I’m attending the annual Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco where more than 10,000 scientists spanning a wide range of fields, from my own planetary science, to hydrology, geology, atmospheric science, heliophysics and more are meeting to present their latest research results. Monday I attended an associated workshop on Human-Tended Suborbital Science. The idea of this program, which has some traction at NASA, is to take advantage of the nascent private-sector suborbital launch industry. That is a boring way of describing the numerous enterprises which hope to sell you a ticket for a ride into space. Soon.
SpaceShipOne won the Ansari X Prize in 2004 by completing two trips into space (for these purposes, technically defined as 100 km in altitude) within two weeks. The $10 million prize was certainly far less than the cost to develop the rocket, but Sir Richard Branson recognized a potential tourist market and now Virgin Galactic is nearing completion of the SpaceShipTwo model which will fly 6 paying passengers at a time to suborbital space for about 5 minutes of weightlessness, a view of the curved horizon, and astronaut wings. The name of the first ship is the VSS Enterprise, warming the hearts of all us Trekkies. Branson reportedly offered Shatner a ticket on the first passenger flight, but the former Star Trek actor apparently would like to see a bit more reliability data before he takes his ride.
Monday’s workshop was a dialog between the many companies developing private suborbital launch capabilities and the scientific community that could take advantage of those flights for scientific experiments. I was there to discuss the science that could be accomplished on such flights with experimental studies of the behavior of small colliding particles in microgravity. I have done these experiments on the space shuttle (expensive, limited access) and parabolic flights (short time in reduced gravity, not a very smooth gravity environment), and 5 minutes on a suborbital rocket would certainly open up a broad new parameter space.
One of the striking things to me about the workshop is how many companies are getting close to having rockets flying. In addition to Virgin Galactic, Jeff Bezos of Amazon.com is leading the Blue Origin company’s development of a passenger-ferrying rocket, SpaceX is selling unmanned payload space, and others presented plans for smaller rockets. Whether I ever personally perform experiments on such a rocket, it will certainly be exciting to watch these projects roll out over the next couple of years, and I felt it was only appropriate for me to wear my Star Trek tie to the meeting.
Parabolas: 15. Vomit: 0
Thursday, December 11th, 2008I completed my seventh lifetime parabolic flight on Sunday, but first flight with the Zero-G corporation. While my earlier flights on NASA’s KC-135 (now retired and replaced by a C-9) involved anywhere from 36 to 51 parabolas, Zero-G does only 15 parabolas on non-research flights. They also currently have a contract to sell flights to NASA, and I think those do the full set of 40-50 parabolas, but the flight I was on Sunday was sponsored by Space Florida for educators, and operated in pretty much the same mode as their passenger flights. The limited number of parabolas is to limit motion sickness. As someone who has gotten violently ill on the longer flights, I think this is a good idea. Paying five grand (their current ticket price) to get violently ill, even with the unique experience of weightlessness, would probably leave a lot of customers grumpy.
Their flight plan begins with one parabola simulating at martian gravity followed by two “lunars”. Parabolas are flown in groups of three followed by a couple of minutes of straight and level flight to get set up for the next set.
I took on board one of the impact experiment chambers from my earlier “Physics of Regolith Impacts in Microgravity Experiment” (PRIME) to do a test run. The experiment basically consists of shooting a marble into a tray of sand at very low speeds in microgravity and measuring the speed and quantity of material ejected. However, because this was being flown as a commercial flight rather than a government flight, it was not possible to evacuate the test chamber. The test material floated out of the target chamber, limiting the amount of ejecta. However, this provided a fairly dramatic demonstration of the effects of air as a lubricant for granular materials and underscores the need for evacuated test chambers on future flights.
I also tried to do a simpler experiment for classroom demonstration of equipartition of energy in a granular gas. That’s a fancy way of saying “watching different-sized marbles bounce around at different speeds”. This was compromised by the lack of foot restraints on the plane and the general chaos of floating bodies throughout the plane volume. Nevertheless, I think I got some good video.
Weightlessness at 25,000 Feet, Give or Take a few Thousand
Friday, December 5th, 2008Sunday December 7 I’ll be flying on the Zero-G Corporation’s “G-Force-1″ airplane (a modified Boeing 727) out of the Space Coast Regional Airport. The pilots of G-Force-1 fly the plane as close as possible to a perfect parabola at a constant horizontal speed and a constant negative acceleration of 9.8 meters per second squared. That is, they make the plane follow the path of a freely falling object. Because all objects, regardless of mass, fall at the same rate (remember Galileo and that famous leaning tower), I and everyone else inside the plane will be in a state of freefall for about 25 seconds per parabola. During that time we will experience the same sensation as astronauts orbiting the Earth.
At the end of each parabola, the plane must accelerate upward giving us a weight of about 1.8 times normal (or 1.8 g’s). During one parabola I’ll be testing a modified experiment on the formation of planets. In particular, I’ll be studying the effects of low-speed collisions between a large object and a collection of small particles to see how well things stick together or blow apart when gravity isn’t present to hold them together. I have done similar experiments on NASA’s version of G-Force-1 before (affectionately known as the “vomit comet”). NASA’s plane typically does 45 parabolas per flight, while Zero-G is kinder to its passengers and limits the parabolas to one simulating martian gravity, two simulating lunar gravity, and 12 zero-g parabolas. With that profile, I am confident I will avoid the upset stomach that plagued me on flights on NASA’s plane.
Alan Stern Leaves NASA
Thursday, March 27th, 2008Alan Stern resigned as NASA’s Associate Administrator of the Science Mission Directorate. In his short tenure as AA Alan had embarked on an ambitious program to overhaul how SMD operates. Speaking from the perspective of a university researcher, his changes to the Research and Analysis programs were a great improvement: faster and better communication between NASA HQ and proposers, longer terms for typical awards coupled with new “on-ramps” for young researchers, new science programs to capitalize on the new exploration initiative, and new programs for small space experiments, such as sounding rocket experiments. Of course, anytime there is something “new” without an increase in the budget means there’s going to be a cut to something “old”. Alan addressed the American Astronomical Society’s Division of Planetary Sciences meeting last October and said that in a zero-sum budget environment, his plan to get new missions and programs started was to hold the line on budget overruns on existing programs. Many high profile missions are running over their budgets. His departure suggests that he may not have had the flexibility he needed to deal with those cost overruns. Hopefully some of the changes he did manage to institute during his short tenure will persist into the new administration.