4.6 Article

Prototype design and testing of a Venus long duration, high altitude balloon

Journal

ADVANCES IN SPACE RESEARCH
Volume 42, Issue 10, Pages 1648-1655

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.asr.2007.03.017

Keywords

Balloon; Aerobot; Venus; Mobility

Funding

  1. Jet Propulsion Laboratory
  2. California Institute of Technology
  3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  4. NASA Wallops Flight Facility
  5. ILC Dover, Inc

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper describes the design, fabrication and testing of a full scale prototype balloon intended for long duration flight in the upper atmosphere of Venus. The balloon is 5.5 m diameter and is designed to carry a 45 kg payload at an altitude of 55 km. The balloon material is a 180 g/m(2) multi-component laminate comprised of the following layers bonded together from outside to inside: aluminized Teflon film, aluminized Mylar film. Vectran fabric and a polyurethane coating. This construction provides the required balloon functional characteristics of low gas permeability, sulfuric acid resistance and high strength for superpressure operation. The design burst superpressure is 39,200 Pa which is predicted to be 3.3 times the worst case value expected during flight at the highest solar irradiance in the mission profile. The prototype is constructed from 16 gores with bi-taped seams employing a sulfuric acid resistant adhesive on the outside. Material coupon tests were performed to evaluate the optical and mechanical characteristics of the laminate. These were followed by full prototype tests for inflation, leakage and sulfuric acid tolerance. The results confirmed the suitability of this balloon design for use at Venus in a long duration mission. The various data are presented and the implications for mission design and operation are discussed. (C) 2007 COSPAR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available