home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.space
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!agate!boulder!ucsu!ucsu.Colorado.EDU!fcrary
- From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
- Subject: Re: Space suit research?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov20.223924.14147@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>
- Sender: news@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: ucsu.colorado.edu
- Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
- References: <1992Nov16.180102.20839@eos.arc.nasa.gov> <1992Nov17.033954.4419@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> <vento-201192160142@elwood.lerc.nasa.gov>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:39:24 GMT
- Lines: 20
-
- In article <vento-201192160142@elwood.lerc.nasa.gov> vento@mars.lerc.nasa.gov (Dan Vento) writes:
- >> Actually, Vail or Aspen at ~10 psi average, would be a better example
- >> than Denver (~12 psi...) I have never understood why NASA doesn't
- >> consider this fact relevant.
-
- >Another reason that NASA does not like low pressure high oxygen (e.g. 5 psi
- >pure oxygen) is the danger of fires in the crew cabin while in orbit. Most
- >materials don't burn easily in low g in "normal" air. Enriched oxygen
- >environments can be a serious problem for materials flammability.
-
- I wasn't suggesting enriched oxygen: A 10 psi, 20% oxygen atmosphere
- should be perfectly acceptable. That's less oxygen than at sea level,
- but certainly enough to support people (even physically active people).
- Since there are cities with this sort of partial pressure of oxygen,
- and people, in fact, go there to be physically active (ski), I'd say
- there is considerable evidence that this isn't a health problem.
-
- Frank Crary
- CU Boulder
-
-