Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Living in Space: A Comparative Study of one Conventional Life Support System and two Biological Systems
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Technology, Department of Engineering Sciences.
2006 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (professional degree), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

In this thesis the energy loads and equivalent mass loads of three life support systems for human space flight have been studied. The physico-chemical system on International Space Station, ISS, has been compared to two concepts for biological life support: the Russian BIOS-3 system and the European MELiSSA system. BIOS-3 is a system where vegetables and wheat are grown hydroponically and waste is burnt. MELiSSA is a system where waste is decomposed by microorganisms in biological reactors. The products of decomposition are used as nutritient for edible Spirulina algae and hydroponically grown plants.

The conceptual layouts of the three systems were found in the literature. They were complemented with assumptions when needed. Data on masses and power consumptions were found in the literature and in fact sheets on commercial equipment from different companies.

The study shows that MELiSSA uses about four times the average power of BIOS-3. ISS and BIOS-3 use approximately the same amount of average power. Regarding equivalent mass, BIOS-3 breaks even with ISS after 2 years. MELiSSA breaks even with ISS after 7.5 years. MELiSSA and BIOS-3 never break even because BIOS-3 has lower startup mass and needs less supply mass than MELiSSA.

The MELiSSA system is more controllable than the BIOS-3 system, due to its biological reactors. It can be discussed whether the reactors also make MELiSSA a more reliable system than BIOS-3. If the BIOS-3 system uses the self-restoring capabilities of plants its reliability might increase.

In conclusion: this study has shown that for a long-term mission a biological life support system might be an economically viable alternative to a physico-chemical one. More empirical research is needed in order to find out how much energy and mass resources biological life support systems need, and whether they can be as reliable as physico-chemical ones.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2006. , 36 p.
Series
UPTEC ES, ISSN 1650-8300 ; 06 013
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-162587OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-162587DiVA: diva2:460979
Educational program
Master Programme in Energy Systems Engineering
Uppsok
Technology
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2011-12-01 Created: 2011-12-01 Last updated: 2011-12-01Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(415 kB)316 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 415 kBChecksum SHA-512
0d887831f305a6b115e00ed1c2e00f8e64f45f7433b3a3940ed3e482ea1ddd85f1866b9a127fd775dc2a3097790b2bb65acc8d8033b9c0dae0a9186d78e656a3
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Department of Engineering Sciences
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 316 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 472 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf