Year
2019
N/A
Project Type
Mechanical Design
Organisation
Royal College of Art | Imperial College London
No Deco
The next several decades will see humanity push further into space. Whether on the Moon, in orbit or even on Mars, we will need to venture out into the environment more than ever. The spacesuits in use today are old and in need of development to improve this experience. This project explores the use of 3D folding geometry to create a joint with greater mobility, thereby allowing the suit to operate at a higher atmospheric pressure, ideally high enough to remove any risk of the bends.
Objectives & Challenges
Problem Statement
Space suits, particularly extra-vehicular activity suits (EVA), have to be pressurised much lower than the standard 1 atmosphere that we breathe here on Earth to maintain mobility. Because of this, astronauts must go through a long process of decompression and nitrogen purging to prevent decompression sickness.
The low pressure is required because the differing pressure outside and inside the suit causes it to want to expand, therefore making it more rigid. Maintaining a consistent internal volume also helps with bending a joint as you don't need to work against the atmosphere even more. (think about an inflated balloon, its surface is rigid, and restores to shape if you push on it)
Target Audience
Astronauts, Pressure suit manufacturers.
Goals | Constraints |
|---|---|
|
|
Process & Approach
Methodology
I chose to look at the neck joint for this project due to the additional freedom of movement required, and identified a relatively simple folding pattern that could be replicated easily for testing and prototyping.
Iteratively testing construction methods to give flexibility and movement as needed before moving to a full trial prototype and pressure test. Finally, some concept development was done through visualisation and rendering.
Pressure testing would need to be done at 1 atmosphere, instead of in a vacuum chamber, but this shouldn't make a big difference so long as the relative pressure difference is the same.
Key Activities | |
|---|---|
|
|
Tools + Technologies | Materials |
|---|---|
|
|
Solution & Deliverables
Final Output
The project resulted in a series of physical artefacts and prototypes, as well as concept imagery. They improved in fidelity, scale and flexibility. Attempts were made to create a pressurised demo but were unsuccessful.
Results & Impact
Outcomes
Generally this project was received poorly. Neither the technical execution, nor the concept development were particularly strong. While an interesting technical problem, this didn't move us towards a solution space.
Lessons Learned
Lots of lessons from this project. It was a big lesson in how to approach to a project as well as why not to stick to a concept rigidly. While it generated some interesting ideas for me, and certainly improved my understanding of deployable structures, it didn't actually address the question of mobility or volume consistency.
In terms of approach, this needed much more rigorous early assessment of feasibility, especially using digital tools to pre-assess the form factor and play with the flexing of it. Some time spent using Python or Matlab scripts, or even more complex assessments in 3D CAD could have helped provide reasonable foundations.
Further, I decided on the project and what I wanted to do, but didn't let the creative process move me around in what was needed. I wanted to test these 3D structures out and found a problem to suit the potential solution, instead of finding a solution to solve a specific problem.
Personal thoughts on the project
If I were to redo things, I probably wouldn't have taken on this project in the first place. However many of the lessons learned discussed above would have made it a better project. Going all in on virtual simulation at the beginning would have given much more backing to it. And then focusing on how the entire assembly would work is the other aspect I would have focused on. How would it interface with non-jointed parts of the space suit. How can we construct something rigid and repairable?
Trying to run a pressurised test was a fine goal, but until deeper work and mastery had been done, it was sort of pointless, as it wouldn't have proven much. Going from virtual, to prototype, and then eventually towards testing in a pressurised environment after the initial project completion date would have made more sense, and eased one burden. Perhaps creating a prototype one could put on, and see how it moves would have been a good piece of work as well, though not super important.
Going forwards, I would need to refresh myself on the state of research and development in the space. It's still an important area to look at and solve for. It may not appear urgent, but with the amount of testing that would be needed before it could actually be worn, the earlier the better.
OTHER PROJECTS
