4.2 Article

Applicability of composite materials for space radiation shielding of spacecraft

Journal

LIFE SCIENCES IN SPACE RESEARCH
Volume 31, Issue -, Pages 71-79

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.lssr.2021.08.004

Keywords

Space radiation; Shielding; Composite material; Total charge changing cross section

Funding

  1. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study demonstrates that composite materials have higher radiation shielding capabilities and can be used for components and fixtures of space vehicles. Compared to aluminum and polyethylene, the stopping power of composite materials used in the study is intermediate, and the total charge-changing cross sections per unit mass are also larger.
Energetic ion beam experiments with major space radiation elements, H-1, He-4, O-16, Si-28 and Fe-56, have been conducted to investigate the radiation shielding properties of composite materials. These materials are expected to be used for parts and fixtures of space vehicles due to both their mechanical strength and their space radiation shielding capabilities. Low Z materials containing hydrogen are effective for shielding protons and heavy ions due to their high stopping power and large fragmentation cross section per unit mass. The stopping power of the composite materials used in this work is intermediate between that of aluminum and polyethylene, which are typical structural and shielding materials used in space. The total charge-changing cross sections per unit mass, sigma(UM), of the composite materials are 1.3-1.8 times larger than that of aluminum. By replacing conventional aluminum used for spacecraft with commercially available composite (carbon fiber / polyether ether ketone), it is expected that the shielding effect is increased by similar to 17%. The utilization of composite materials will help mitigate the space radiation hazard on future deep space missions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available