Evaluation of Brine Processing Technologies for Spacecraft Wastewater

Shaw, Hali L.; Flynn, Michael; Wisniewski, Richard; Lee, Jeffery; Jones, Harry; Delzeit, Lance; Shull, Sarah; Sargusingh, Miriam; Beeler, David; Howard, Jeanie; Howard, Kevin; Harris, Linden; Parodi, Jurek; Kawashima, Brian

NASA NTRS · 20160001250

Evaluation of Brine Processing Technologies for Spacecraft Wastewater

Shaw, Hali L.·Flynn, Michael·Wisniewski, Richard·Lee, Jeffery·Jones, Harry·Delzeit, Lance·Shull, Sarah·Sargusingh, Miriam·Beeler, David·Howard, Jeanie·Howard, Kevin·Harris, Linden·Parodi, Jurek·Kawashima, Brian

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Brine drying systems may be used in spaceflight. There are several advantages to using brine processing technologies for long-duration human missions including a reduction in resupply requirements and achieving high water recovery ratios. The objective of this project was to evaluate four technologies for the drying of spacecraft water recycling system brine byproducts. The technologies tested were NASA's Forward Osmosis Brine Drying (FOBD), Paragon's Ionomer Water Processor (IWP), NASA's Brine Evaporation Bag (BEB) System, and UMPQUA's Ultrasonic Brine Dewatering System (UBDS). The purpose of this work was to evaluate the hardware using feed streams composed of brines similar to those generated on board the International Space Station (ISS) and future exploration missions. The brine formulations used for testing were the ISS Alternate Pretreatment and Solution 2 (Alt Pretreat). The brines were generated using the Wiped-film Rotating-disk (WFRD) evaporator, which is a vapor compression distillation system that is used to simulate the function of the ISS Urine Processor Assembly (UPA). Each system was evaluated based on the results from testing and Equivalent System Mass (ESM) calculations. A Quality Function Deployment (QFD) matrix was also developed as a method to compare the different technologies based on customer and engineering requirements.

Explore related subjects

recycling brine water

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Shaw, Hali L., Flynn, Michael, Wisniewski, Richard, Lee, Jeffery, Jones, Harry, Delzeit, Lance, Shull, Sarah, Sargusingh, Miriam, Beeler, David, Howard, Jeanie, Howard, Kevin, Harris, Linden, Parodi, Jurek, Kawashima, Brian. 2015-07-12. Evaluation of Brine Processing Technologies for Spacecraft Wastewater. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20160001250

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

DOE OSTI2022

Analysis of hydrogen fueling, recycling, and confinement at Wendelstein 7-X via a single-reservoir particle balance

Abstract A single-reservoir particle balance for the main plasma species hydrogen has been established for W7-X. This has enabled the quantitative characterization of the particle sources in the standard island divertor configuration for the first time. Findings from attached scenarios with two different island sizes with a boronized wall and turbo molecular pumping are presented. Fueling efficiencies, particle flows and source locations were measured and used to infer the total particle confinement time τ p . Perturbative gas injection experiments served to measure the effective particle confinement time τ p * . Combining both confinement times provides access to the global recycling coefficient R ¯ . Hydrogen particle inventories have been addressed and the knowledge of particle sources and sinks reveals the core fueling distribution and provides insight into the capability of the magnetic islands to control exhaust features. Measurements of hydrogen fueling efficiencies were sensitive to the precise fueling location and measured between 12% and 31% with the recycling fueling at the strike line modeled at only 6%, due to much higher densities. 15% of the total 5.2 × 10 22 a/s recycling flow ionizes far away from the recycling surfaces in the main chamber. It was shown that 60% of recycled particles ionize above the horizontal and 18% above the vertical divertor target, while the remainder of the recycling flow ionizes above the baffle (7%). Combining these source terms with their individual fueling efficiencies resolves the core fueling distribution. Due to the higher fueling efficiency in the main chamber, up to 51% of the total 5.1 × 10 21 s −1 core fueling particles are entering the confined plasma from the main chamber. τ p values in the range of 260 ms were extracted for these discharges. Together with τ p , the global recycling coefficient R ¯ was resolved for every τ p * measurement and a typical value close to unity was obtained. An increase of the island size, resulted in no change of τ p , but doubled τ p * , indicating the feasibility of the control coils as an actuator to control exhaust features without affecting core confinement properties.

recycling↗

NASA NTRS2016

Results of the FY15 Brine Evaporation Bag (BEB) Technology Down-Select Testing

The Brine Evaporation Bag (BEB) recently participated in the Brine Concentrator Technology (BCT) Technology Down-Select (TDS). It was found that the BEB System is able to process ISS (International Space Station) Alternate Pretreat Brine at a rate high enough for ISS application as well as future deep space missions. The BEB System is also capable of processing the brine to a solid residue which will add to the stability and safety of storing the brine residue. The results of the BEB testing for the BCT-TDS will be presented in this paper.

recycling↗

NASA NTRS2015

The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of Life Support Recycling and Resupply

Brief human space missions supply all the crew's water and oxygen from Earth. The multiyear International Space Station (ISS) program instead uses physicochemical life support systems to recycle water and oxygen. This paper compares the Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of recycling to the LCC of resupply for potential future long duration human space missions. Recycling systems have high initial development costs but relatively low durationdependent support costs. This means that recycling is more cost effective for longer missions. Resupplying all the water and oxygen requires little initial development cost but has a much higher launch mass and launch cost. The cost of resupply increases as the mission duration increases. Resupply is therefore more cost effective than recycling for shorter missions. A recycling system pays for itself when the resupply LCC grows greater over time than the recycling LCC. The time when this occurs is called the recycling breakeven date. Recycling will cost very much less than resupply for long duration missions within the Earth-Moon system, such as a future space station or Moon base. But recycling would cost about the same as resupply for long duration deep space missions, such as a Mars trip. Because it is not possible to provide emergency supplies or quick return options on the way to Mars, more expensive redundant recycling systems will be needed.

recycling↗