2mm hole in ISS

[Vanamonde]

Oh, I'm sure they're right about it being manageable. But if I were up there, my reaction would be 

[wumpus]

7 hours ago, Cassel said:

What if someone would try to use finger to block it? :-)

According to Scott Manley (the Oracle of KSP), that was step one.  Step two involved space tape (I'd thought "aircraft grade" tape would work, even common duct tape should work).  Duck tape was insufficient: I think the unpatched 2mm hole would leak out in 2 weeks, suspect it leaks much slower with duct tape.  No idea what the pressure for "in 2 weeks of unpatched time" leaves: 1/2 STP is about 4km up (serious mountaineering, but survivable), I think the "dead zone" is 30-40kPa or 1/3 STP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzTSnvthZYw

 

[linuxgurugamer]

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

Transferring implies in a donor and a receiver. There's no necessarily a receiver on irradiation.

 The receiver would be deep space

[mikegarrison]

3 hours ago, Lisias said:

As far as I know, it's "irradiated", not exactly "transferred" as we are used to see here, under an atmosphere.

Radiation is one of the standard modes of heat transfer here on Earth, too. Convection, conduction, radiation.

Conduction works just fine in space if you are touching something. Radiation works fine in space. Convection, however, requires a fluid for you to transfer the heat to, so except for evaporation, vacuum has no convection.

Radiation doesn't actually require a receiver. What happens is that you radiate heat everywhere, but everywhere radiates heat back at you. So if you are standing in a room where all the walls are exactly the same temperature as your skin, your net radiation would be zero. For every watt you radiated away, the walls would radiate a watt back to you. In space in the shadows, however, you radiate a watt away and deep space radiates almost nothing back to you. So your net radiation heat transfer is very large. On the other hand, in space in the sunlight you radiate a watt away and the sun radiates several watts to you.

Edited August 30, 2018 by mikegarrison

[sh1pman]

4 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

Radiation works fine in space.

Works even better in space than on Earth. Here, surrounding air can absorb the heat and keep the object warm. In space, the object will radiate away all of its heat until it reaches the equilibrium with CMB (something like 3K). Unless it’s in direct sunlight.

[KG3]

I've heard that the space shuttle's windows got pitted and dinged on occasion by such strikes.  I've never heard of one being breached by a strike.  I know those windows were very thick bullet proof type glass but how thick and bullet proof are the walls of the ISS?  What might have happened to the impactor?  Would it have entered the ISS streaked across the crew compartment like a meteor and burned up?  Could it have lodged in the opposite wall or bounced around for a while?  What would have happened if a cosmonaut was leaning (er, floating) against that wall during impact?  Are ISS inhabitants supposed to wear eye protection?  

[mikegarrison]

7 minutes ago, KG3 said:

I've heard that the space shuttle's windows got pitted and dinged on occasion by such strikes.  I've never heard of one being breached by a strike.  I know those windows were very thick bullet proof type glass but how thick and bullet proof are the walls of the ISS?  What might have happened to the impactor?  Would it have entered the ISS streaked across the crew compartment like a meteor and burned up?  Could it have lodged in the opposite wall or bounced around for a while?  What would have happened if a cosmonaut was leaning (er, floating) against that wall during impact?  Are ISS inhabitants supposed to wear eye protection?  

Bad things can happen in space.

Bad things can happen on Earth, too.

[Green Baron]

Gerst loves to let people know, maybe he'll tell us how it felt.

My bet is on "slightly warm", if at all :-)

(was it at day ?)

Edited August 31, 2018 by Green Baron

[cubinator]

I imagine it would be rather loud, what with the speed of the escaping air. At least until it was plugged.

[Reactordrone]

5 hours ago, NSEP said:

But the outside of the spacecraft is cold with the lack of sunlight.

The Soyuz has insulating covers all over the crew sections so the temperature shouldn't be too different from the air temperature inside the vehicle.

[Kerbart]

9 hours ago, Cassel said:

Why would it freeze? Temperature is not transferred in a vacuum.

To be pedantic, temperature never transfers. When my grandma shrinks over the years as my little brother grows I don't say that they're transferring length either.

Heat transfers and that can result in temperature change. And that can still transfer in a vacuum (through radiation); otherwise the Parker Solar Probe wouldn't need a heat shield.

[Lisias]

3 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

Radiation is one of the standard modes of heat transfer here on Earth, too. Convection, conduction, radiation.

Conduction works just fine in space if you are touching something. Radiation works fine in space. Convection, however, requires a fluid for you to transfer the heat to, so except for evaporation, vacuum has no convection.

If I understood correctly all the Physics lessons, what we call "heat" is nothing more than Energy in waveform - as light. In a way, we are all lamps irradiating thermal energy, in the same way a LED irradiates energy in the visible spectrum (but not only), or a FM transmitter emits electromagnetic waves. Sometimes, such thermal irradiation is on the visible spectrum (molten iron).

Being that… How exactly my body would irradiate heat directly to my walls, and the walls directly back to me, with all that air between me and the wall? Would not be the convention the responsible for the heat transfer? After all, there're moles and moles of air molecules in the way to absorb and refract such emissions.

— POST-EDIT — 

I think I answered my own question, while typing the question!  

Heat is energy, and sometimes it's visible (molten iron). So it shares physical properties with light. Some bodies absorbs light, others are transparent to it. It's the same with infra-red and ultra-violet emissions (not surprisingly).

So it appears to me that air is somewhat (but not entirely) transparent to heat. So my body emissions reach the walls. And vice versa.

Makes sense? It's correct?

Edited August 31, 2018 by Lisias
added insight

[Bill Phil]

6 hours ago, Lisias said:

Transferring implies in a donor and a receiver. There's no necessarily a receiver on irradiation.

The energy transfers from the object to the electromagnetic wave, which then carries it away. 

Transfer in this context is just moving the heat somewhere else. In this case, anywhere else suffices. Even empty space works, though the radiation will eventually lose energy as the wave traverses space. But that's fine, too. 

6 minutes ago, Lisias said:

If I understood correctly all the Physics lessons, what we call "heat" is nothing more than Energy in waveform - as light. In a way, we are all lamps irradiating thermal energy, in the same way a LED irradiates energy in the visible spectrum (but not only), or a FM transmitter emits electromagnetic waves. Sometimes, such thermal irradiation is on the visible spectrum (molten iron).

 

Heat is the energy transferred from one system to another through thermal interactions, per wikipedia. Doesn't have to be light.

[Lisias]

5 minutes ago, Bill Phil said:

Transfer in this context is just moving the heat somewhere else. In this case, anywhere else suffices. Even empty space works, though the radiation will eventually lose energy as the wave traverses space. But that's fine, too. 

I failed to follow you. My understanding is that the energy of a wave can be dispersed, not "loosed". Radiation irradiates (ugh…) in a spheric "format", and as this sphere grows in radius, the distance between the waves grows too. If some mass is near the emission point, a lot of such waves hit the mass. If such mass is far enough, the waves could pass around it and the "heat" is not transferred a bit - but all that energy is still there - only scattered to all directions.

[Cassel]

10 hours ago, NSEP said:

But the outside of the spacecraft is cold with the lack of sunlight.

How it can be cold? No air means no temperature or I am missing something?

[Dafni]

1 minute ago, Cassel said:

How it can be cold? No air means no temperature or I am missing something?

Yes, but no temperature is cold, asolute zero in fact.

[Xd the great]

22 minutes ago, Cassel said:

How it can be cold? No air means no temperature or I am missing something?

It is cold because the lack of EM waves in the space.

[mikegarrison]

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

If I understood correctly all the Physics lessons, what we call "heat" is nothing more than Energy in waveform - as light. In a way, we are all lamps irradiating thermal energy, in the same way a LED irradiates energy in the visible spectrum (but not only), or a FM transmitter emits electromagnetic waves. Sometimes, such thermal irradiation is on the visible spectrum (molten iron).

Being that… How exactly my body would irradiate heat directly to my walls, and the walls directly back to me, with all that air between me and the wall? Would not be the convention the responsible for the heat transfer? After all, there're moles and moles of air molecules in the way to absorb and refract such emissions.

— POST-EDIT — 

I think I answered my own question, while typing the question!  

Heat is energy, and sometimes it's visible (molten iron). So it shares physical properties with light. Some bodies absorbs light, others are transparent to it. It's the same with infra-red and ultra-violet emissions (not surprisingly).

So it appears to me that air is somewhat (but not entirely) transparent to heat. So my body emissions reach the walls. And vice versa.

Makes sense? It's correct?

Yes, thermal radiation is photons.

4 hours ago, Bill Phil said:

Heat is the energy transferred from one system to another through thermal interactions, per wikipedia. Doesn't have to be light.

Thermal radiation is transfered by photons, but not necessarily in the visible spectrum.

Heat is energy. When heat is transfered from one thing to another, the first thing loses some energy and the second thing gains some energy. Thermal radiation is one way this can happen -- photons carry energy from the first thing to the second thing. Conduction is another way this can happen -- for conduction the two things are touching and the molecular vibrational energy of the first thing makes the molecules of the second thing vibrate, and this transfers energy from the first thing to the second thing. Convection is another way the energy is transfered -- it involves a fluid (like air or water) flowing and carrying the heat from the first thing to the second thing.

The net flow of heat always moves from things at a higher temperature to things at a lower temperature. This is essentially another way of stating the second law of thermodynamics. If anything ever spontaneously moved a net amount of heat from something cold to something hot, that would reverse entropy.

1 hour ago, Cassel said:

How it can be cold? No air means no temperature or I am missing something?

Temperature can be measured without air. Deep space has been measured to be 2.7 degrees kelvin. The reason it is not 0 kelvin is because of background radiation believed to be left over from the Big Bang.

Edited August 31, 2018 by mikegarrison

[peadar1987]

It's a 1 bar pressure difference across a 2mm hole, I'd say a few layers of duck tape would be plenty to seal it for now before they can get a patch epoxied on.

[Green Baron]

6 hours ago, Lisias said:

Heat is energy, and sometimes it's visible (molten iron). So it shares physical properties with light. Some bodies absorbs light, others are transparent to it. It's the same with infra-red and ultra-violet emissions (not surprisingly).

It is electromagnetism, only difference being the frequency. IR is directly below visible (longer wavelength), UV above (shorter). One can filter parts of the spectrum out to have only certain wavelengths for pictures or study of material properties.

Quote

So it appears to me that air is somewhat (but not entirely) transparent to heat.

Exactly. To visible light and UV almost completely. To IR partly, but not much over short distances and dry air. Warmth e.g. from molten iron is radiated mostly in the IR spectrum, body heat as well. IR cameras ...

Quote

So my body emissions reach the walls. And vice versa.

And are, depending on the material reflected, dispersed or absorbed. Absorption would heat the wall.

And if the wall is too cold or hot you'd step aside.

Quote

Makes sense? It's correct?

Yep.

Disclaimer: i am not a physicist. I think it shows :-)

Edited August 31, 2018 by Green Baron

[Vexillar]

9 hours ago, KG3 said:

how thick and bullet proof are the walls of the ISS?

Different parts of the station are designed with different amounts of protection, and types of shielding.

Lots of detail here: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20120002584.pdf

[Green Baron]

This wasn't clear to me until recently: it is not a module of the iss that was hit, but the ball shaped orbital module of a docked Sojus ship (the MS 09).

https://blogs.nasa.gov/spacestation/2018/08/30/international-space-station-status-3/

It will not effect crew return since that part is ditched before reentry.

Edited August 31, 2018 by Green Baron

[Tw1]

I love that they used tape on it. Fancy tape, but still tape. 

[Racescort666]

4 hours ago, peadar1987 said:

It's a 1 bar pressure difference across a 2mm hole, I'd say a few layers of duck tape would be plenty to seal it for now before they can get a patch epoxied on.

I feel like the pressure of spacecraft get overstated a lot. Yes, it's a pressure vessel but the pressure differential is less than that of a pop can, or a car tire, or something 10 m (33 ft) underwater. It's not really unreasonable in terms of pressure vessels.

Also to reiterate, the leak is in the orbital section of one of the Soyuz docked at the station, not the station itself.

[Vexillar]

3 hours ago, Green Baron said:

It will not effect crew return since that part is ditched before reentry.

That's good to know... but wait... isn't the descent module pressurised?  So do they suit up before returning, or will they have to hold their breath  while crawling through?