Let’s say that the world economy allowed us to start building the ISS on the 1950s, making is quite acceptable for a spaceman to smoke some cigarettes while spacemaning. How would the cigarette react on space? Would it work? Would the smoke react like a liquid?
They did not smoke in space craft in the 1960s as it was a fire hazard. Or on long range bomber in the 1950s.
The Commander of Apollo 7 Wally Schiarra insisted on Coffee for this reason.
Not sure what you’re thinking of in terms of “liquid” behavior, but fires tend not to burn as vigorously in a zero-g environment as they do here on earth unless there is externally-applied convection.
A fire here on earth relies on its heat to create an upward draft carrying combustion products away and drawing in fresh air to sustain the reaction. In a zero-g environment, if the air is quiescent, the combustion products will accumulate around the flame and tend to smother it; the flame has to rely on diffusion to bring oxygen toward the flame through a layer of combustion products that grows thicker and thicker. So it tends not to burn very vigorously.
The flip side is that at such an early date in the space program, they might have chosen to fill the ISS with a pure-oxygen atmosphere, as they did on the disastrous Apollo 1 mission. It likely would have been only about 3 psi (same partial-pressure as oxygen has here on earth), but without the diluent effects of an additonal 11.7 psi of nitrogen, any flame would likely burn hotter and more intensely than it would on the present-day ISS, with its 14.7-psi N2/O2 atmosphere.
An astronaut holding a cigarette, waving it around and occasionally taking a drag off of it might be able to provide enough draft to keep a cigarette burning but if he left it clipped to the wall of the ISS, it would probably go out on its own instead of continuing to smolder as it does here on earth.
Ash collection would be an issue. Here on earth, you set your cigarette in (or flick it against) an ash tray, and the ashes fall into the tray. In space, this won’t work, since the ashes won’t fall. If you’re really gentle, you could end up with a four-inch stub of ash on your cigarette. More likely you’d have to occasionally hold your cigarette near some sort of vacuum device to suck in the loose ashes.
I am agree with you that wasn’t possible at that time.
You don’t need a device, just a small hole in the wall. That will clear the smoke also.
Two off-topic questions which I hope no one will mind.
-
Is the OP doing research for a sci-fi novel of some kind? I really don’t mind, just curious.
-
Does the SDMB tend to attract authors? Many questions seem somewhat contrived. Again, I have no problem with this, just curious.
The un-contrived questions all got answered long ago.
Arthur C. Clarke’s novel Earthlight includes discussion of smoking on a spaceship, specifically mentioning that a high oxygen concentration would make it burn down especially quickly.
One thing to consider is that the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (“tars” as they are colloqually known) which give cigarette smoke the aroma and “taste” normally settle on surfaces nearby the the smoker as anyone who has had to clean a home or workspace occupied by a smoker can attest. In the ISS, on the other hand, forced induction is used to ensure that freshly oxygenated air is constantly circulated through the habitable modules while carbon dioxide is uptaken by the Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA). Adding a comtaminant like cigarette smoke to the environment means that it would also be dispersed throughout the entire habitat and impinge upon all available surfaces, including inside of delicate electronics, sensors, and experiments, where buildup will eventually change both thermal and conductivity properties. So, basically, you’d have the entire station smelling like an ashtray, a thin layer of sticky tar on every available surface, and contamination problems on sensors and electronics, not to mention gunking up the CDRA and other parts of the ECLSS.
Stranger
No, but you just gave me an idea for a new story to write. Thanks! Also, I think that the authors might gather more on The Cafe Society forum.
I actually don’t care about the fire, possible explosions of the spacecraft or death of everyone on board… I just wnated to know how would a cigarette behave on a 0g environment.
What happens if Spaceman Spiff switches to low tar cigarettes?
Or if he changes his name to Spaceman Spliff?
“Low tar” is a bullshit marketing ploy. Most so-called low tar cigarettes have similar levels of PAHs as regualr cigarettes, and cigareete manufacturers manipulate the nicotine delivery rates on “light” cigarettes to induce smokers to consume them at a higher rate.
Stranger
I understand they have a smoking area just outside…
Worked on US nuclear submarines for almost 60 years. They had some sensitive gear.
Equipment in a submarine does not operate under the conditions that electronics in the ISS, and of course it is serviced and replaced/refurbished on a regular basis. ISS hardware (like all spacecraft avionics) is “S-rated” (qualified for operation in the high radiation space environment), which ironically makes it more prone to thermal overload, and exposed sensors are sensitive to a number of other potential failure modes if not maintained in a low particulate environment, hence why spacecraft are processed in clean room environments. I’ve worked on computing systems where people were allowed to smoke, and both the exterior and interior of the enclosure gets coated with a layer of greasy, sticky tar which tends to attract more fines that agglomerate. In a freefall environment where dust and even larger particles do not readily come to rest on horizontal surfaces, the contamination problem is even more difficult to control, hence why the ISS has one of the most sophisticated envxironmental control and monitoring systems ever designed including purpose-designed air filtration systems.
Of course, in the 'Fifties, all of the electronics would have been high power vacuum tube electronics or very primitive transistors which would be far less sensitive than the s-rated components or VLSI semiconductor devices in use today. In that case, the aerosol particulates would be much less of an issue. The power requirements and rejecting the enormous output waste heat, on the other hand, would be a spectacular problem.
Stranger
Heh. This.
Building the ISS in the 50’s? The “world economy” (OP) isn’t the primary obstacle.