Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Radiation Protection”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 415 records · Page 23
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

PNNL Sequim Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest Site Office has oversight and stewardship duties associated with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Sequim Campus. Some research projects have the potential to emit low levels of radioactive materials. This report is prepared to document compliance with the Code of Federal Regulation, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, "Radiation Protection–Air Emissions." Compliance is indicated by comparing the estimated effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) member of the public with the 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard. The PNNL Sequim Campus has only fugitive emissions sources. Despite the fact that the regulations are intended for application to point source emissions, fugitive emissions are included with regard to complying with the EPA standard. The EDE to the Campus MEI due to routine operations in 2021 was 5.4E-05 mrem (5.4E-07 mSv). No non-routine emissions occurred in 2021. The Sequim Campus is in compliance with the federal and state 10 mrem/yr standard.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗
DOE OSTI2023

PNNL-Sequim Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2022

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest Site Office has oversight and stewardship duties associated with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Sequim Campus. Some research projects have the potential to emit low levels of radioactive materials. This report is prepared to document compliance with the Code of Federal Regulation, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, "Radiation Protection–Air Emissions." Compliance is indicated by comparing the estimated effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) member of the public with the 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard. The PNNL-Sequim Campus has only fugitive emissions sources. Despite the fact that the regulations are intended for application to point source emissions, fugitive emissions are included with regard to complying with the EPA standard. The EDE to the Campus MEI due to routine operations in 2022 was 7.5E-07 mrem (7.5E-09 mSv). No non-routine emissions occurred in 2022. The PNNL-Sequim Campus is in compliance with the federal and state 10 mrem/yr standard.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗
NASA NTRS2002

A comparison of quality factors and weighting factors for characterizing astronaut radiation exposures

Radiation exposures are typically characterized by two quantities. The first is the absorbed dose, or the energy deposited per unit mass for specific types of radiation passing through specified materials. The same amount of energy deposited in material by two different types of radiation, however, can result in two different levels of risk. Because of this, for the purpose of radiation protection operations, absorbed dose is modified by a second factor intended to normalize the risk associated with a given exposure. We present here an inter-comparison of methods for this modification. First is the radiation quality factor (Q), as defined by ICRP publication 60. This quantity is related functionally to the unrestricted linear energy transfer (LET) of a given radiation, and is multiplied by the absorbed dose to derive the dose equivalent (H). The second method for modifying absorbed dose is the radiation weighting factor, also given in ICRP-60, or as modified in NCRP report 115. To implement the weighting factor, the absorbed dose resulting from incidence of a particular radiation is multiplied by a factor assigned to that type of radiation, giving the equivalent dose. We compare calculations done based on identical fields of radiation representative of that encountered by the MIR space station, applying each of these two methods. c2002 COSPAR. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

NASA Center JSC↗
DOE OSTI2023

PNNL-Richland Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2022

This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the 2022 highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an offsite member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, “Radiation Protection–Air Emissions.” The dose to the PNNL Richland Campus MEI from routine major and minor point source emissions in 2022 from PNNL Richland Campus sources is 2.1E-5 mrem (2.1E-7 mSv) EDE. The dose from all fugitive sources is 1.2E-6 mrem (1.2E-8 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 9.2E-9 mrem (9.2E-11 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2022. The total radiological dose to the MEI from all PNNL Richland Campus radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 2.3E-5 mrem (2.3E-7 mSv) EDE, or more than 100,000 times less than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, with which the PNNL Richland Campus is in compliance.

40 CFR 61 Subpart↗
DOE OSTI2018

PNNL Richland Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2017

This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the 2017 highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an offsite member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, “Radiation Protection–Air Emissions.” The dose to the PNNL Richland Campus MEI from routine major and minor point source emissions in 2017 from PNNL Richland Campus sources is 2.1E-5 mrem (2.1E-7 mSv) EDE. The dose from all fugitive sources is 2.1E-6 mrem (2.1E-8 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 3.9E-10 mrem (3.9E-12 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2017. The total radiological dose to the MEI from all PNNL Richland Campus radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 2.3E-5 mrem (2.3E-7 mSv) EDE, or more than 10,000 times less than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, with which the PNNL Richland Campus is in compliance.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗
DOE OSTI2020

PNNL Richland Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2019

This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the 2019 highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an offsite member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, “Radiation Protection–Air Emissions.” The dose to the PNNL Richland Campus MEI from routine major and minor point source emissions in 2019 from PNNL Richland Campus sources is 1.4E-5 mrem (1.4E-7 mSv) EDE. The dose from all fugitive sources is 1.3E-6 mrem (1.3E-8 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 1.5E-10 mrem (1.5E-12 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2019. The total radiological dose to the MEI from all PNNL Richland Campus radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 1.5E-5 mrem (1.5E-7 mSv) EDE, or more than 10,000 times less than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, with which the PNNL Richland Campus is in compliance.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗
DOE OSTI2021

PNNL Richland Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2020

This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the 2020 highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an offsite member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, “Radiation Protection–Air Emissions.” The dose to the PNNL Richland Campus MEI from routine major and minor point source emissions in 2020 from PNNL Richland Campus sources is 1.5E-5 mrem (1.5E-7 mSv) EDE. The dose from all fugitive sources is 2.0E-6 mrem (2.0E-8 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 9.3E-9 mrem (9.3E-11 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2020. The total radiological dose to the MEI from all PNNL Richland Campus radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 1.7E-5 mrem (1.7E-7 mSv) EDE, or more than 100,000 times less than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, with which the PNNL Richland Campus is in compliance.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗
DOE OSTI2022

PNNL Richland Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2021

This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the 2021 highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an offsite member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, “Radiation Protection–Air Emissions.” The dose to the PNNL Richland Campus MEI from routine major and minor point source emissions in 2021 from PNNL Richland Campus sources is 1.7E-5 mrem (1.7E-7 mSv) EDE. The dose from all fugitive sources is 1.2E-6 mrem (1.2E-8 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 2.1E-9 mrem (2.1E-11 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2021. The total radiological dose to the MEI from all PNNL Richland Campus radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 1.8E-5 mrem (1.8E-7 mSv) EDE, or more than 100,000 times less than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, with which the PNNL Richland Campus is in compliance.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗
DOE OSTI2019

PNNL Richland Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2018

This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the 2018 highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an offsite member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, “Radiation Protection–Air Emissions.” The dose to the PNNL Richland Campus MEI from routine major and minor point source emissions in 2018 from PNNL Richland Campus sources is 1.6E-5 mrem (1.6E-7 mSv) EDE. The dose from all fugitive sources is 2.1E-6 mrem (2.1E-8 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 5.6E-10 mrem (5.6E-12 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2018. The total radiological dose to the MEI from all PNNL Richland Campus radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 1.8E-5 mrem (1.8E-7 mSv) EDE, or more than 10,000 times less than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, with which the PNNL Richland Campus is in compliance.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗
DOE OSTI2018

Nevada National Security Site Integrated Groundwater Sampling Plan, Revision 1

The purpose is to provide a comprehensive, integrated approach for collecting and analyzing groundwater samples to meet the needs and objectives of the DOE/EM Nevada Program’s UGTA Activity. Implementation of this Plan will provide high-quality data required by the UGTA Activity for ensuring public protection in an efficient and cost-effective manner. The Plan is designed to ensure compliance with the UGTA Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) (NNSA/NFO, 2015); Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (1996, as amended); and DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment (DOE, 2013). The Plan’s scope comprises sample collection and analysis requirements relevant to assessing both the extent of groundwater contamination from underground nuclear testing and impact of testing on water quality in downgradient communities. This Plan identifies locations to be sampled by CAU and location type, sampling frequencies, sample collection methodologies, and the constituents to be analyzed. In addition, the Plan defines data collection criteria such as well purging, detection levels, and accuracy requirements/recommendations; identifies reporting and data management requirements; and provides a process to ensure coordination between NNSS groundwater sampling programs for sampling analytes of interest to UGTA. Information used in the Plan development—including the rationale for selection of wells, sampling frequency, and the analytical suite—is discussed under separate cover (N-I, 2014) and is not reproduced herein. This Plan does not address compliance for those wells involved in a permitted activity. Sampling and analysis requirements associated with these wells are described in their respective permits and are discussed in NNSS environmental reports (see Section 5.2). In addition, sampling for UGTA CAUs that are in the Closure Report (CR) stage are not included in this Plan. Sampling requirements for these CAUs are described in the CR. Frenchman Flat is currently the only UGTA CAU in the CR stage. Sampling requirements for this CAU are described in Underground Test Area (UGTA) Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 98: Frenchman Flat Nevada National Security Site, Nevada (NNSA/NFO, 2016).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2015

Deep Space Storm Shelter Simulation Study

Missions outside of Earth's magnetic field are impeded by the presence of radiation from galactic cosmic rays and solar particle events. To overcome this issue, NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems Radiation Works Storm Shelter (RadWorks) has been studying different radiation protective habitats to shield against the onset of solar particle event radiation. These habitats have the capability of protecting occupants by utilizing available materials such as food, water, brine, human waste, trash, and non-consumables to build short-term shelters. Protection comes from building a barrier with the materials that dampens the impact of the radiation on astronauts. The goal of this study is to develop a discrete event simulation, modeling a solar particle event and the building of a protective shelter. The main hallway location within a larger habitat similar to the International Space Station (ISS) is analyzed. The outputs from this model are: 1) the total area covered on the shelter by the different materials, 2) the amount of radiation the crew members receive, and 3) the amount of time for setting up the habitat during specific points in a mission given an event occurs.

Dugan, Kathryn↗
DOE OSTI2016

Bremsstrahlung Dose Yield for High-Intensity Short-Pulse Laser–Solid Experiments

A bremsstrahlung source term has been developed by the Radiation Protection (RP) group at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory for high-intensity short-pulse laser–solid experiments between 10 17 and 10 22 W cm –2 . This source term couples the particle-in-cell plasma code EPOCH and the radiation transport code FLUKA to estimate the bremsstrahlung dose yield from laser–solid interactions. EPOCH characterizes the energy distribution, angular distribution, and laser-to-electron conversion efficiency of the hot electrons from laser–solid interactions, and FLUKA utilizes this hot electron source term to calculate a bremsstrahlung dose yield (mSv per J of laser energy on target). The goal of this paper is to provide RP guidelines and hazard analysis for high-intensity laser facilities. In conclusion, a comparison of the calculated bremsstrahlung dose yields to radiation measurement data is also made.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Feedback on Forty-year Long Clean-up Operations of a Contaminated Soil for Environmental Purpose - 20026

One of the CEA facilities in France is the place of miscellaneous mapping and clean-up operations since the 1980's. The final purpose of the conducted work deals with the environmental remediation of the building. In France, the absence of a regulatory framework for the management of sites polluted by radioactive substances, especially as the lack of release thresholds, has led to develop different approaches of soil radiological characterization. The geostatistical approach is part of them. Preliminary investigations are an unavoidable step prior to clearance and remediation. First, historical analysis enables to define site perimeters to investigate as well as to precisely locate expected contaminated parts. For radioactive pollutants, the media (water, soil, air) and transfer routes participate in the definition of the investigation perimeter and thus also need to be identified through a geological study. At the same time, functional analysis leads to choose the best measurement means which could provide useful information when combined with visual inspection. An equipment well adapted to easy-to-measure radionuclides as gamma emitters, such as gamma probe or on-site gamma spectrometry, is usually selected as a non-destructive assay. Coupled with spatial positions, processed on-site radiological data can be mapped. Data processing consists in mapping and kriging before a geostatistical analysis in order to identify the zones of interest to be targeted. Selected zones are not only linked to high level count rates but also to low level ones so that a pollution-free reference is known in the area. This data processing also enables to categorize waste types according to their origin and contamination levels. An expected volume of different waste then follows as well as the waste characterization equipments. In-depth investigations, e.g. core drillings and samplings, naturally ensue to aim at remediation optimization through the assessment of environmental impact. After clean-up operations, non-destructive assays as well as destructive samplings enable to check the effective clearance. Following this methodology in the present remediation work, results of the first non-destructive assay campaign highlighted a long-lived transuranic radionuclides contamination in the concrete flagstone. Successive non-destructive assays were then performed in the defined zones of interest. Count rates measured with a surface probe were first mapped. The best localization of destructive assays, i.e. core drillings at a 1 meter depth, came from this surface mapping followed by a geostatistical analysis. The concrete flagstone was totally removed. Then, the depth of soil to remove under the flagstone was optimized from the results of radiological activities measured in core drillings samples. A new surface mapping was then drawn after this partial soil excavation. The sand and demolition rubble samples, homogeneously constituted from the flagstone fragments, were analyzed by gamma spectrometry. Meanwhile, waste drums and other containers were also measured by gamma spectrometry and passive neutron measurement devices. All these results have brought miscellaneous pieces of information. In this context, major issues appear in terms of physical constraints such as the premises tininess as well as of soil sampling techniques and in terms of measurement performances assessment and the representativeness of homogeneous samples. The choice of radiological soil and waste characterization devices is described in the light of enhanced performances by keeping in mind radiation protection requirements and a willing to always optimize waste categories (very low level waste) and volume. The improvement of the characterization methods appears through this forty-year long work while sharing the feedback of encountered difficulties. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-391: Assessment and Elimination of the Angular Dependence of the Response of the NanoDot OSLD System in MV Beams

Purpose: Assess the angular dependence of the nanoDot OSLD system in MV X-ray beams at depths and mitigate this dependence for measurements in phantoms. Methods: Measurements for 6 MV photons at 3 cm and 10 cm depth and Monte Carlo simulations were performed. Two special holders were designed which allow a nanoDot dosimeter to be rotated around the center of its sensitive volume (5 mm diameter disk). The first holder positions the dosimeter disk perpendicular to the beam (en-face). It then rotates until the disk is parallel with the beam (edge on). This is referred to as Setup 1. The second holder positions the disk parallel to the beam (edge on) for all angles (Setup 2). Monte Carlo simulations using GEANT4 considered detector and housing in detail based on microCT data. Results: An average drop in response by 1.4±0.7% (measurement) and 2.1±0.3% (Monte Carlo) for the 90° orientation compared to 0° was found for Setup 1. Monte Carlo simulations also showed a strong dependence of the effect on the composition of the sensitive layer. Assuming 100% active material (Al??O??) results in a 7% drop in response for 90° compared to 0°. Assuming the layer to be completely water, results in a flat response (within simulation uncertainty of about 1%). For Setup 2, measurements and Monte Carlo simulations found the angular dependence of the dosimeter to be below 1% and within the measurement uncertainty. Conclusion: The nanoDot dosimeter system exhibits a small angular dependence off approximately 2%. Changing the orientation of the dosimeter so that a coplanar beam arrangement always hits the detector material edge on reduces the angular dependence to within the measurement uncertainty of about 1%. This makes the dosimeter more attractive for phantom based clinical measurements and audits with multiple coplanar beams. The Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service is a joint initiative between the Australian Department of Health and the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2018

Action levels for airborne uranium in the workplace: chemical and radiological assessments

In this study, a method is described for deriving two levels of action—an investigation level (IL) and an immediate action level (IAL)—for different forms and mixtures of the natural uranium (U) isotopes 234 U, 235 U, and 238 U in air in the workplace. An IL indicates the need to confirm the validity of moderately elevated measurements of airborne U and adequacy of confinement controls and determine whether work limitations are appropriate. An IAL indicates that safeguards should be put into place immediately, including removal of workers from further exposure until conditions are acceptable. Derivations of ILs and IALs are based on latest radiation protection guidance, information on chemical toxicity of U, and biokinetic models for U. An action level (IL or IAL) is the more restrictive of two derived values, the action level based on U as a chemical hazard and the action level based on U as a radiation hazard.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2022

General Employee Radiological Training: 24 Month Refresher (Course #47968)

GERT is required by the 10 CFR 835, the Federal Regulation on Radiation Protection that we follow here at LANL. It’s the training for non Rad Workers who may enter Radiological Controlled Areas (RCAs) and Radioactive Material Areas (RMAs) in an unescorted manner. If your work assignment requires access to areas posted for higher radiological hazards like Radiological Buffer Areas (RBAs), Radiation Areas, Contamination Areas, and others you are required to have Rad Worker training. Once you complete this training you will be qualified to access RCAs and RMAs at LANL without an escort. However, you are not qualified to operate radiation producing devices, work with radioactive material, or do work where you may receive greater than 100 mrem of exposure in a year.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-591: Measurement and Monte Carlo Simulation of Stray Neutrons in Passive Scattering Proton Therapy: Needs and Challenges

Purpose: Measure stray radiation inside a passive scattering proton therapy facility, compare values to Monte Carlo (MC) simulations and identify the actual needs and challenges. Methods: Measurements and MC simulations were considered to acknowledge neutron exposure associated with 75 MeV ocular or 180 MeV intracranial passively scattered proton treatments. First, using a specifically-designed high sensitivity Bonner Sphere system, neutron spectra were measured at different positions inside the treatment rooms. Next, measurement-based mapping of neutron ambient dose equivalent was fulfilled using several TEPCs and rem-meters. Finally, photon and neutron organ doses were measured using TLDs, RPLs and PADCs set inside anthropomorphic phantoms (Rando, 1 and 5-years-old CIRS). All measurements were also simulated with MCNPX to investigate the efficiency of MC models in predicting stray neutrons considering different nuclear cross sections and models. Results: Knowledge of the neutron fluence and energy distribution inside a proton therapy room is critical for stray radiation dosimetry. However, as spectrometry unfolding is initiated using a MC guess spectrum and suffers from algorithmic limits a 20% spectrometry uncertainty is expected. H*(10) mapping with TEPCs and rem-meters showed a good agreement between the detectors. Differences within measurement uncertainty (10–15%) were observed and are inherent to the energy, fluence and directional response of each detector. For a typical ocular and intracranial treatment respectively, neutron doses outside the clinical target volume of 0.4 and 11 mGy were measured inside the Rando phantom. Photon doses were 2–10 times lower depending on organs position. High uncertainties (40%) are inherent to TLDs and PADCs measurements due to the need for neutron spectra at detector position. Finally, stray neutrons prediction with MC simulations proved to be extremely dependent on proton beam energy and the used nuclear models and cross sections. Conclusion: This work highlights measurement and simulation limits for ion therapy radiation protection applications.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
NASA NTRS2012

Concept for Hydrogen-Impregnated Nanofiber/Photovoltaic Cargo Stowage System

A stowage system was conceived that consists of collapsible, reconfigurable stowage bags, rigid polyethylene or metal inserts, stainless-steel hooks, flexible photovoltaic materials, and webbing curtains that provide power generation, thermal stabilization, impact resistance, work/sleeping surfaces, and radiation protection to spaceflight hardware and crew members. Providing materials to the Lunar surface is costly from both a mass and a volume standpoint. Most of the materials that will be transferred to other planets or celestial bodies will not be returned to the Earth. In developing a plan to reconfigure pressurized logistics modules, it was determined that there was a requirement to be able to utilize the interior volume of these modules and transform them from Logistics Modules to Storage/Living Quarters. Logistics-to-living must re-utilize stowage bags and the structures that support them to construct living spaces, partitions, furniture, protective shelters from solar particle events, galactic cosmic radiation, and workspaces. In addition to reusing these logistics items for development of the interior living spaces, these items could also be reused outside the habitable volumes to build berms that protect assets from secondary blast ejecta, to define pathways, to stabilize high traffic areas, to protect against dust contamination, to secure assets to mobility elements, to provide thermal protection, and to create other types of protective shelters for surface experiments. Unique features of this innovation include hydrogen-impregnated nano fibers encapsulated in a polyethelyne coating that act as radiation shielding, flexible solar collection cells that can be connected together with cells from other bags via the webbing walls to create a solar array, and the ability to reconfigure each bag to satisfy multiple needs.

Kennedy, Kriss J.↗