Astronaut plugged the hole in ISS with his finger

OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,225
Reactions
16,849
It just wasn't that big of a deal.
NASA definitely supports your opinion on this one. They say astronauts had 18 days before they would run out of air. Of course they do not specify to what degree. 100% vacuum inside ISS or just enough to die.
Last Thursday, Earth-based personnel monitoring the ISS first noticed the drop in cabin pressure. It was not severe enough to threaten the astronauts aboard the station, so the six-member crew of Expedition 56 was not alerted until they awoke the next day.
The issues I have with this.
1. Apparently a hole in the ISS is not a big deal. Ground Control assumes that an hourly loss of .6 mercury bar of air pressure due to an air leak is not gonna get any worse, so the just wait till the next morning for the crew to wake up to let them know. A hole in the ISS is not an emergency obviously.
2. “The hole discovered in the International Space Station (ISS) was drilled deliberately, the Russian space agency has said.”

“Authorities are unsure whether tiny hole in a Soyuz capsule was created in a production facility on the ground or on board the ISS.”

Soyuz-09 where the hole was discovered, was a part of the ISS since June 06, 2018.

With the hole being confirmed drilled, and the picture suggests that it indeed was, we have two issues.
  • If it was drilled on the ground prior to June 06, why fo they still have air on board, and how come it was not discovered earlier?
  • If it was drilled by one of the astronauts on board last Thursday, I do not see any news about a suicidal crew member being restrained on the ISS. What if he drills 10 more tomorrow?
3. The Finger Issue. With vacuum not sucking, and pressure pushing... would you honestly plug a 2mm hole with your own finger on one of the below hemispheres?

B1E1E7CF-E1FA-4332-A4D8-6A7B760DF65A.jpeg
 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,348
Thanks for the pic, hadn't seen that. I don't think that hole looks drilled, but I can't offer any better alternative. The hole is at a funny angle, boogered to hell, and doesn't look quite round, certainly not drilled with a proper tool anyways. And what's with the chowder marks nearby? People that make gutters have better quality control.

Sure there are lots of mysteries about the who and why and how of the hole, and I don't trust NASA, but the hole itself, I agree with them, not a big deal. I've seen some people saying one thing and others saying something else. "Authorities" are still unsure.

3. Yes the ball. Let's drop the 2mm hole for maths sake, and make it a one inch square hole. Surely now my whole body will be sucked into the sphere. Let's see, assuming a perfect vacuum, I've got a little less than 15psi trying to get into the ball. So, 15 lbs of force, probably enough to pop a few blood vessels, but I don't bleed for free, so I'd pass.

Now it wouldn't be the vacuum making the bruises mind, empty space has a hard time actively hurting anyone. What happens is that our internal fluid pressure is constantly in balance with the 14.7 psi atmospheric pressure. On the ball side, where the atmosphere is evacuated, our fluid pressure is now out of balance with the surrounding and wants to expand into the hole. That's what's gonna leave The suction cup marks, or make a bruise. The 15 pounds on the outside, just wants keep our hand against the hole.

Remember, that vacuum in that ball was created by a piston pump with leather valves. If the leather can take it...
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,225
Reactions
16,849
LOL:
Funny how in the beginning it was a micro meteorite, but due to leaked pictures they had to go with a drill. I don't know about you, but it does look drilled.

The crew repaired the hole after first temporarily blocking it with European Space Agency astronaut Alexander Gerst's thumb.

ISS hole before and after
issholebeforeafter.jpg

I just don't get it. Are they saying it's Space on the other side of the hole? I apologize, but none of it makes any sense.

Finger issue: inside the finger we have approximately 101.3 kPa (14.7 psi).

low_orbit_air_pressure.png

On the other side of the hole we are supposed to have from 10 nPa (1.4503774389728E-11 psi) to 700 nPa (1.015264207281E-9 psi).

If somebody is comfortable with placing his thumb over that hole, it sure is not me.

Professor Andrew Higgins stated that 14.7psi vs Space Vacuum would cause the air leak through the hole at sonic velocity (Mach 1 at constriction of the leak). That is 767 MPH. In other words placing a hand on the other side of the hole (outside of ISS) would allow for an experience of a 2mm air stream hitting that hand at a speed 200MPH faster than Boeing 747's cruising speed. That would be naive to think that there would be no damage to that hand.

And considering that the thumb psi, and inside ISS air psi are virtually the same...
Although European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Alexander Gerst initially plugged the leaking hole with his thumb, temporarily stabilizing the pressure, the hole was eventually covered with Kapton tape, which is often used in spacecraft due to its ability to function across a very wide range of temperatures.
Show me his thumb, for none of this makes any sense.

Of course we have this super explanation from Tecnology.Org
Well, let’s see these questions one by one. First of all, could Gerst be pulled out into space through that little hole essentially turning into a liquid? And the answer is no. He wasn’t risking it at all and didn’t have problems pulling his finger away. The atmospheric pressure in International Space Station is pretty much the same as on Earth – around 101.3 kPa. That means that every square centimetre is pressed with 1.03 kg of force. Outside pressure, of course, is nothing, which means that Gerst’s finger was being squeezed out with everything atmospheric pressure could do. But it wasn’t one square centimetre – it was 4 square millimetres or 0.04 square centimetres. So the force on astronaut’s finger was pretty minimal – around 41 grams.

Those 52 grams don’t sound like much, but remember that they were acting on a small area of skin. So could it be damaged? Again, no. Gerst could easily move his finger around to a new spot on his skin to avoid irritation. Don’t mind the water in his finger either. Even though water boils in a vacuum chamber, there is not much water in such a tiny are of skin to cause any problems. In fact, our skin is very good at containing the water so no damage could be done. And finally, even though outside temperatures vary a lot, Gerst wasn’t really touching anything. Remember that vacuum is a pretty good isolator. The outside surfaces of the ISS do get very cold or very hot, but Gerst wasn’t touching them. And he didn’t hold his thumb there for a long time – duct tape was on its way.
It is even accompanied by the video. Somebody is stressing out out there. The attraction of extra attention to our space programs opened a can of worms.

In other words, use duct tape to fix holes in ISS any time there is one in its hull, vacuum is overrated, and duct tape is a pretty strong stuff.

Sorry, not buying none of this.

Funny, but apparently those submarine guys need some duct tape to fix all their possible hull problems. Just slap some duct tape outside at 600 feet over a small hole. It's only 282 psi down there at 200 meter depth. 13.3 time difference with regular air pressure for a sub vs. 16600 times difference for the ISS.

Go duct tape: 3M Co.
 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,348
LOL:
Funny how in the beginning it was a micro meteorite, but due to leaked pictures they had to go with a drill. I don't know about you, but it does look drilled.

The crew repaired the hole after first temporarily blocking it with European Space Agency astronaut Alexander Gerst's thumb.

ISS hole before and after
View attachment 8324
I just don't get it. Are they saying it's Space on the other side of the hole? I apologize, but none of it makes any sense.

Finger issue: inside the finger we have approximately 101.3 kPa (14.7 psi).


On the other side of the hole we are supposed to have from 10 nPa (1.4503774389728E-11 psi) to 700 nPa (1.015264207281E-9 psi).

If somebody is comfortable with placing his thumb over that hole, it sure is not me.

Professor Andrew Higgins stated that 14.7psi vs Space Vacuum would cause the air leak through the hole at sonic velocity (Mach 1 at constriction of the leak). That is 767 MPH. In other words placing a hand on the other side of the hole (outside of ISS) would allow for an experience of a 2mm air stream hitting that hand at a speed 200MPH faster than Boeing 747's cruising speed. That would be naive to think that there would be no damage to that hand.

And considering that the thumb psi, and inside ISS air psi are virtually the same...


Show me his thumb, for none of this makes any sense.

Of course we have this super explanation from Tecnology.Org


It is even accompanied by the video. Somebody is stressing out out there. The attraction of extra attention to our space programs opened a can of worms.

In other words, use duct tape to fix holes in ISS any time there is one in its hull, vacuum is overrated, and duct tape is a pretty strong stuff.

Sorry, not buying none of this.

Funny, but apparently those submarine guys need some duct tape to fix all their possible hull problems. Just slap some duct tape outside at 600 feet over a small hole. It's only 282 psi down there at 200 meter depth. 13.3 time difference with regular air pressure for a sub vs. 16600 times difference for the ISS.

Go duct tape: 3M Co.
Your looking at this the wrong way. A submarine is at negative relative pressure and the spaceship is at positive relative pressure. The water at 282 psi is exerting around 20 times as much force on the outside of the sub as the air pressure at 14.7psi exerts on the inside of the spaceship.

The water wants to get into the sub at that depth 20 times as much as the air wants to leave the spaceship.

This is not esoteric stuff. It can be calculated and tested relatively easily. Some of it can be counter intuitive, especially when you start to think about the vacuum of space. Calculus has that effect sometimes. It gets really complex, as do the formulas.
For example, if you did the math, you would find very quickly that your 767 number had no basis in the real world, and such an "air jet" would not be there. In space, no one can hear you scream, and with an infinite volume for the second container, the speed of sound approaches 0 almost instantly. How close to the hole would your ear have to be to hear someone inside? To have enough air pressure to hear anything at all?

So while there may be some points along the cross section of the hole where gas is expanding at a rate approaching the speed of sound (in practice, it will be less, depending on several factors), this is to calculate the volume of air escaping the vessel. If you want to know what is happening to that volume of air at any given point on its path, you will need some additional math.

This is pretty off the top of my head, and I'm no physicist, but I have done a lot of calculus in my day as well as worked professionally with pressurized gases and vacuum powered machines.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,225
Reactions
16,849
The strength of the vacuum inside this weird either chinese or russian treatment is thousands times less than the space vacuum. Technically it’s not even vacuum, but rather a temperature related gas volume change.

A6929EAE-80E5-4C7A-96B4-54AD5F9A0EFC.jpeg
1DA50D08-A046-431D-B12E-EDC353B91DD6.jpeg9F30E3DB-6ECF-4970-B7E2-C23FB1EB2543.jpeg
done wrong
44387445-7FF3-4384-AAA5-2F5B92880818.jpeg
That’s what pressure equalizing using skin looks like.
And this vacuum is not even close to that hemisphere horse pulling experiment vacuum they generated.

Just like I said, that german astronaut needs to show his thumb. May be there is no vacuum in space, I don’t know.
 

BStankman

Well-known member
Messages
628
Reactions
2,968
I get more competent service from government workers at my DMV.
There it is just nepotism, and not membership in some fraternal organization.

Lies upon lies upon lies.
The devil speaks with a forked tongue.
81eb9e12.png
 
Last edited:

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,348
The strength of the vacuum inside this weird either chinese or russian treatment is thousands times less than the space vacuum. Technically it’s not even vacuum, but rather a temperature related gas volume change.

That’s what pressure equalizing using skin looks like.
And this vacuum is not even close to that hemisphere horse pulling experiment vacuum they generated.

Just like I said, that german astronaut needs to show hos thumb. May be there is no vacuum in space, I don’t know.
Know all about cupping. Been there done that. What your not getting, is there is no strength to a vacuum. The units we use for this are relative to earth atmosphere. Torr for example is 1/760 of an atmosphere. 1/760 of 14.7 psi.

Surface area has a tremendous effect on the pressure differential. The other big factor is volume.

Again, it is not vacuum making those marks o those peoples backs. It is their internal body pressure, no longer held back by the weight of atmosphere, pushing out.

You have somewhere around 2000 pounds of air stacked on your head and shoulders when standing at sea level. So does the air next to you. Doesn't feel so heavy does it? How much air would an astronaut have stacked on them?
Post automatically merged:

ETA Cupping technically is a vacuum. Which is just a word we use for negative relative pressure. Temperature is only part of the equation. When done properly, this should be eliminated or controlled. The chemical process of burning off the oxygen will create a pressure differential on its own.
 
Last edited:
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,225
Reactions
16,849
You have somewhere around 2000 pounds of air stacked on your head and shoulders when standing at sea level. So does the air next to you. Doesn't feel so heavy does it? How much air would an astronaut have stacked on them?
Astronauts on ISS would have the equivalent of the exact same 40,000 pounds of air pushing on their shoulders. No different from Earth.

And pressure difference is what’s going to cause major damage to that thumb attached to a hole leading to space vacuum, in my opinion.

In that video of a train car crushed by sucked out air. I would like to see somebody’s thumb pluging a 2mm hole, as well as what would happen first, the thumb lose its skin with some meat, or the car crumble.
 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,348
Astronauts on ISS would have the equivalent of the exact same 40,000 pounds of air pushing on their shoulders. No different from Earth.

And pressure difference is what’s going to cause major damage to that thumb attached to a hole leading to space vacuum, in my opinion.

In that video of a train car crushed by sucked out air. I would like to see somebody’s thumb pluging a 2mm hole, as well as what would happen first, the thumb lose its skin with some meat, or the car crumble.
There is one example of a whole hand being exposed to low earth orbit pressures, for a significant time. I've seen myself a hand swelled up the size of a balloon.

Those cars are not put under vacuum intentionally. Mistakes were made and/or safety devices failed.

Guys, this is basic, tested, tried and true math.

A 2mm round hole would be less than 1/4 inch square hole by a fair margin. I put my guesstimate for surface area of the tank at about 1500 square feet, or 216,000 square inches. The area of a 1/4 inch square hole is 1/16 of a square inch. At a pressure differential (vacuum) of 10psi, (-10 on the guage, which has 0 at 14.7 actual, and around what they seem to crush at, in the demonstrations I've watched) this gives us 2,160,000 pounds of force exerting more or less evenly across that tank, until it crushes. Of which, a thumb over a 1/4 inch square hole would have a portion of around 10 ounces.

I don't think 10 ounces is gonna push or pull me anywhere. Now I don't want to be anywhere in the path of that crushing, when those 2 Million plus pounds of force begin to convince that steel tank that it's harboring unnaturally low pressures.

Do you think that vacuum ball would be easier or harder to pull apart in space? At the bottom of the ocean? Would a cube work as well? Why?
Post automatically merged:

Astronauts on ISS would have the equivalent of the exact same 40,000 pounds of air pushing on their shoulders. No different from Earth.

And pressure difference is what’s going to cause major damage to that thumb attached to a hole leading to space vacuum, in my opinion.

In that video of a train car crushed by sucked out air. I would like to see somebody’s thumb pluging a 2mm hole, as well as what would happen first, the thumb lose its skin with some meat, or the car crumble.
Correct. What is providing this equivalent force?

Correct, except that major damage would be limited to suction marks (caused by body pressure. Surface area here matters a lot) and a spot of dry skin (boiling point of liquids tied to pressure).

Car would crumble before your body could push any meat through a 2mm hole. Exsanguination could be a concern under the right conditions. The right conditions would be tough to achieve with a 2mm hole.
 
Last edited:
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,225
Reactions
16,849
Do you think that vacuum ball would be easier or harder to pull apart in space? At the bottom of the ocean? Would a cube work as well? Why?
That vacuum ball would not hold together in space for on Earth it’s being held by our atmospheric pressure which is absent in space.

On the bottom of the ocean you would have to add all the additional pressure attributed to water, obvivously would be much harder to separate.

Shape is obviously irrelevant as ling as you have enclosed space inside allowing for a good seal.
Correct. What is providing this equivalent force?
Allegedly ISS has several systems generating an earthlike atmosphere.

And as far as no damage to thumb and crumbling cars go... take a simple 1/4 inch metal tube. Put one end to your finger tip and suck some air out as hard as you can with your mouth. You will most likely see an imprint on your fingertip.

Now we replace the mouth with that pump that crumbled the train car. The pump does not pull on your finger, it creates vacuum by extracting air molecules from that tube thus creating the difference in air pressure. We will still have 14.7 psi on the outside of the tube, and watever lowered psi that pump is able to create on the inside of the tube.

You would have the exact same enclosed system as in the case with a tank car. Only this time, before our atmospheric pressure gets a chance to crumble the metal tube, it will make a good use of its weakest point inside the enclosure, which is the skin, meat and whatever else. Whether we consider the finger being shoved inside by our mesely 14.7 psi, or by the power of vacuum trying to fill itself via sucking in air molecules around it is probably irrelevant to the finger.

If you really think it would not rip off and suck in a chunk of your finger, I don’t know what to say.

By the way, if you think that the vacuum is not a big deal. I think, Mark Sargent is about to put up some money based challenge. A NASA certified open space suit (which I doubt he will be provided with) to be worn by anyone, including current and former astronauts inside a non-NASA vacuum chamber.

 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,348
Shape is not irrelevant at all. Shape is very important with any pressure vessel. A cube would not perform the same.

I had a venturi vacuum pump that I used to pull vacuums with a bottle of liquid CO2 to power it. I would step down the 750 or so iirc psi of CO2 (temp dependent) to about 20 psi output to the venturi. It would quickly pull over 5 psi vac at the 1/2 diameter nozzle if blocked. Like with my hand. I never left it on for any length of time to see how much it could pull max.

It's not that i dont think a vacuum could be a big deal, it's really just simple math, and surface area plays a huge role. Sometimes it is a big deal.

Like on a pool or other large drain. Goodness gracious what a horrible tragedy when you get a body subjected to that kind of pressure differential over that large an area.

Or that poor woman that got sucked out the plane window. A small hole would not have had the same effect. It's happened. It took the whole window going out to get enough air to move fast enough.

Or when the air pressure in your house pushes the roof off because the happens to be a large fast spinning low pressure mass(tornado) directly above it.

This hole though, the one on the ISS, is a slow leak in a car.

A nail hole in your tire is, relative to overall size, much larger than this hole in the ISS. The pressure differential for a tire is much higher than the pressure differential in the ISS. 45psi tire - 15psi vs 15psi - ~0psi. (This tire would read 30psi on a typical guage, this is low end)

Nothing special happens in this regard as you approach zero with these numbers, it is totally relative.

The specifics matter. Mythbusters picked up a car with a regular vacuum cleaner...
 
Last edited:
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,225
Reactions
16,849
1e-8pa (low orbit vacuum) is aporoximately 145,000 psi only the force will be aimed in the opposite direction (negative). When we can get that much pressure into that tire, we could probably use a tire as an example.

10,000 meter depth will give you approximately 14560 psi. 10 times less.

The shape of the object under pressure is not important for this topic, in my opinion. The square footage of the surface the pressure can be applied to is. If it’s square, triangle, sphere or banana, they will all receive an equal pressure treatment as long as their square surfaces are of the same size. People have different shapes, yet are treated equally by the atmospheric pressure.

Back to the finger. 14.7 internal body psi would want to equalize with 697 negative psi of space vacuum. We do have about 3 square mm out of 625 square mm in a square inch.

On a submarine at hypothetical 600 meters, the water pressure on the same 3 square mm would only be 4psi. At 10,000 meter depth we would get approximately 70 psi.
 

Glumlit

Well-known member
Messages
90
Reactions
368
Both holes look to be the work of the same tool.

Bi-Metal-Hole-Saw.jpg

a hole saw

It looks like whoever was supposed to drill the big holes made a mistake where he started to put the first one. Realized the mistake after the first bit went through, then proceeded to drill the big holes as he was supposed to initially on the correct face of the angle.

The material looks like painted aluminum. Less than 1/8" thick, on an aluminum backing that is also less than 1/8" think. The three silvery lines being where the teeth of the saw took out surface chunks on the perpendicular face three times around before the bit made it through. (The edge of the big hole is very close to the corner).

So as a dude who's used tools like this on materials like that to make holes that look like those, that's my professional opinion.

As for whether there's a mass of outer space lazily yet safely dripping through that hole, I'm not gonna hold my breath.
 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,348
Shape is not irrelevant at all. Shape is very important with any pressure vessel. A cube would not perform the same.

I had a venturi vacuum pump that I used to pull vacuums with a bottle of liquid CO2 to power it. I would step down the 750 or so iirc psi of CO2 (temp dependent) to about 20 psi output to the venturi. It would quickly pull over 5 psi vac at the 1/2 diameter nozzle if blocked. Like with my hand. I never left it on for any length of time to see how much it could pull max.

It's not that i dont think a vacuum could be a big deal, it's really just simple math, and surface area plays a huge role. Sometimes it is a big deal.

Like on a pool or other large drain. Goodness gracious what a horrible tragedy when you get a body subjected to that kind of pressure differential over that large an area.

Or that poor woman that got sucked out the plane window. A small hole would not have had the same effect. It's happened. It took the whole window going out to get enough air to move fast enough.

Or when the air pressure in your house pushes the roof off because the happens to be a large fast spinning low pressure mass(tornado) directly above it.

This hole though, the one on the ISS, is a slow leak in a car.

A nail hole in your tire is, relative to overall size, much larger than this hole in the ISS. The pressure differential for a tire is much higher than the pressure differential in the ISS. 45psi tire - 15psi vs 15psi - ~0psi. (This tire would read 30psi on a typical guage, this is low end)

Nothing special happens in this regard as you approach zero with these numbers, it is totally relative.
1e-8pa (low orbit vacuum) is aporoximately 145,000 psi only the force will be aimed in the opposite direction (negative). When we can get that much pressure into that tire, we could probably use a tire as an example.

10,000 meter depth will give you approximately 14560 psi. 10 times less.

The shape of the object under pressure is not important for this topic, in my opinion. The square footage of the surface the pressure can be applied to is. If it’s square, triangle, sphere or banana, they will all receive an equal pressure treatment as long as their square surfaces are of the same size. People have different shapes, yet are treated equally by the atmospheric pressure.

Back to the finger. 14.7 internal body psi would want to equalize with 697 negative psi of space vacuum. We do have about 3 square mm out of 625 square mm in a square inch.

On a submarine at hypothetical 600 meters, the water pressure on the same 3 square mm would only be 4psi. At 10,000 meter depth we would get approximately 70 psi.
Ah, maybe this is where you're confused. 1 x e^-8 is not -145000. Not remotely. 1e^-8 is 3.4 ten thousandths, approximately. Or 0.00034 psi. Or 3.4 ten thousandths away from perfect vacuum.

So a pressure differential of 14.7 psi. I think we can leave off the ten thousandths for this conversation. 2-4 times less than the pressure differential in a typical car or truck tire. Around 1/1000 of the dP 10,000m depth example.

Yes, we can effectively rule out the shape for most of this conversation, by assuming a given relative pressure which is being held by the container. But not in the practical application if the vacuum ball. What about size?
Post automatically merged:

Ah, maybe this is where you're confused. 1 x e^-8 is not -145000. Not remotely. 1e^-8 is 3.4 ten thousandths, approximately. Or 0.00034 psi. Or 3.4 ten thousandths away from perfect vacuum.

So a pressure differential of 14.7 psi. I think we can leave off the ten thousandths for this conversation. 2-4 times less than the pressure differential in a typical car or truck tire. Around 1/1000 of the dP 10,000m depth example.

Yes, we can effectively rule out the shape for most of this conversation, by assuming a given relative pressure which is being held by the container. But not in the practical application if the vacuum ball. What about size?
ETA. I neglected to change pascals to psi. It would be more like 1.x ten thousandths after conversion.

BOLD: I dont know how many more ways I can say this.
There is no such thing as negative psi. Perfect vacuum is 0 psi absolute. We talk about a vacuum as a negative pressure RELATIVE to another pressure. SPACE is effectively ZERO psi. Or, as you helpfully showed us, about 0.0001x psi in LEO. The only pressure differential in space is the pressure you bring with you.
Post automatically merged:

Both holes look to be the work of the same tool.

View attachment 8359
a hole saw

It looks like whoever was supposed to drill the big holes made a mistake where he started to put the first one. Realized the mistake after the first bit went through, then proceeded to drill the big holes as he was supposed to initially on the correct face of the angle.

The material looks like painted aluminum. Less than 1/8" thick, on an aluminum backing that is also less than 1/8" think. The three silvery lines being where the teeth of the saw took out surface chunks on the perpendicular face three times around before the bit made it through. (The edge of the big hole is very close to the corner).

So as a dude who's used tools like this on materials like that to make holes that look like those, that's my professional opinion.

As for whether there's a mass of outer space lazily yet safely dripping through that hole, I'm not gonna hold my breath.
It does look like that could be the culprit, it wouod explain the chowder marks, but a couple problems. The hole happened after paint, the large hole happened before paint. The hole is rough and ugly, and at a funny angle, and too close to the corner. None of which lines up with a high rpm tool, or a high speed steel bit. Especially in a soft metal like aluminum. The worst, overused and abused pilot bits make a better hole.
 
Last edited:
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,225
Reactions
16,849
Yep, you are right. That’s what happens when I’m not paying attention and do 10 things simultaneously. I actually downplayed it a lot.

In your example with the tire, you have 14.7 outside and may be 36 inside, which is a 2.5 time difference roughly. In other words inside pressure pushing on the tire with twice greater force then the outside one.

In that sub example we have 280psi on the outside vs 14.7 inside. That is 17 time difference between pressures.

On ISS we have 14.7 psi inside vs 1e -10 psi on the outside. And that is with 700 nano pascales, which is pretty generous. The difference between pressures is 147,000,000,000 times.

Are there any mistakes now?
 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,348
Yep, you are right. That’s what happens when I’m not paying attention and do 10 things simultaneously. I actually downplayed it a lot.

In your example with the tire, you have 14.7 outside and may be 36 inside, which is a 2.5 time difference roughly. In other words inside pressure pushing on the tire twice twice greater then the outside one.

In that sub example we have 280psi on the outside vs 14.7 inside. That is 17 time difference between pressures.

On ISS we have 14.7 psi inside vs 1e -10 psi on the outside. And that is with 700 nano pascales, which is pretty generous. The difference between pressures is 147,000,000,000 times.

Are there any mistakes now?
Yes.

The 36 psi of the tire is still relative, not absolute. The psi on the gauge IS the differential, we have to measure it from inside our atmosphere, the gauge cancels out the 14.7. Factor doesn't matter, only differential. 36psi

1e^-10 is .000045. As psi that is effectively zero. The factor doesn't matter. Only the difference. 14.7 on the inside. 14.7 psi effective differential.

Sub, 265.3 psi differential. Minimum the hull must withstand for that depth.

Where factor comes into play, is when we want to compare these differentials. I.E. Pressure will be x times higher y deep underwater or these tires require twice the pressure of those. The sub is has to withstand 7.x times the differential as the tire.

Surface area comes in when we want to calculate the force.

Volume comes in when we want to calculate once things start moving.

There is a lot of calculus. Which I am very rusty at.
 
Last edited:
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,225
Reactions
16,849
Apologies, but this way everything is relative, which explains nothing.

Calculus is not that complicated here. Whatever the square footage, or inchage, lol, of the inside of the ISS is, gets multiplied by 14.7 psi. That way we know the combined internal pressure exerted on the inside. Than we do the same for the outside and multiply by 1e -10 psi. This way we will know that the inside of the ISS pushes on the hull with some number of pounds. The outside balances it with its own number.

Of course we are going to end up with the inpossibility of the ISS flying up there in general, for no hull would sustain it and just explode.
 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,348
In fact you are making it too complicated. 1 e-10 is effictively zero. There are virtually no molecules there to exert any force on the outside of the space station. The vessel contains the 14.7. It is engineered to do so, the same way a sub is engineered not to crush under 265, and a tire is engineered to have the most tread-road contact and least deflection at its rated pressure.

Finding this surface area and the force is necessary to do that engineering(where shape certainly does matter), but we are not trying to re-engineer the station, just discuss a small, suspiciously appearing leak.
 

PrincepAugus

Well-known member
Messages
443
Reactions
889
Lol, funny @KorbenDallas and @ISeenItFirst can't agree with each other. I'm not a physicist, so I will not answer any of them. But one thing's for sure, a lot of unnecessary news about it with differing info makes it suspicious.
 

LordAverage

Well-known member
Messages
83
Reactions
288
The maths and physics could probably be argued all day (I get where ISeenItFirst is coming from to a degree but I guess there's arguments about dogmatic educations and such that could go further).

Either way, what I think is most likely is they have a long list of ideas to keep news about space and the ISS relevant and this one was a bit on the sillier side, already theres conflicting reports (meteorite strike, drilled hole??) so maths or not it probably wasn't their greatest headline news to push out. (after all, how many of us really think it's up there in LEO or whatever). When was the hole drilled, how was it just noticed now etc.
 

Top