Is exposure to lunar dust a long term health hazard for a future lunar base?

"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rusty Barton news.surewest.net wrote:
In the 19th and early 20th century, hard rock miners developed
silicosis of the lungs due to inhaling dust produced from hard rock
mining. In a future lunar base, would repeated exposure to lunar dust
pose similar hazards? Would there be similar problems on Mars or
asteroids?

Breathing *any* particulates -- any sort of dust or smoke -- into your
lungs on a regular basis is a bad idea. In any such setting, some degree
of dust control would be needed for health.

On the Moon, and quite possibly elsewhere, *serious* dust control would be
needed in any case to keep the abrasive dust from getting into suit joints
and other mechanisms.

The Apollo crews used a brush of some sort, but it wasn't effective at
removing all the dust (as images of the A17 crew will attest). A vacuum
cleaner would be better, combined with coveralls which would help to protect
the suit joints.

--
Alan Erskine
alanerskine(at)optusnet.com.au
Is Lewis Moran the type of father figure
John Howard wants for Australian children?

In article ,
says...
"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rusty Barton news.surewest.net wrote:
In the 19th and early 20th century, hard rock miners developed
silicosis of the lungs due to inhaling dust produced from hard rock
mining. In a future lunar base, would repeated exposure to lunar dust
pose similar hazards? Would there be similar problems on Mars or
asteroids?

Breathing *any* particulates -- any sort of dust or smoke -- into your
lungs on a regular basis is a bad idea. In any such setting, some degree
of dust control would be needed for health.

On the Moon, and quite possibly elsewhere, *serious* dust control would be
needed in any case to keep the abrasive dust from getting into suit joints
and other mechanisms.

The Apollo crews used a brush of some sort, but it wasn't effective at
removing all the dust (as images of the A17 crew will attest). A vacuum
cleaner would be better, combined with coveralls which would help to protect
the suit joints.

The Apollo crews used an assortment of brushes and vacuum cleaners to try
and control the dust inside the LM cabin, with little success.

The problem with lunar dust, in particular, is that it was generated in
an airless environment and there is no aeolian weathering whatsoever, so
the rock component tends to be made up of sharp, jagged particles. (I
think air has a greater and quicker erosive effect on very small
particles than you'd expect, because of its scale.) It's very abrasive.
And it's chemically reactive -- exposure to air seems to make it stick to
surfaces less.

So, while the crew was on the surface, dust would stick to everything and
no amount of brushing would get most of it off. As soon as they
repressurized the LM, it would fall off the suits (except where it was
ground in) and gather on the floor. The best they could do to keep the
cabin clean was to have the crew step into big bags after they got in.
The bags caught a lot of the dust as it was shed from the suits. (But
they only came up with that idea for the J-missions, where the crews took
off their suits between EVAs.)

The Apollo 11 crew didn't have any kind of dust brush. The Apollo 12
crew had one, as I recall, but it wasn't very effective. Later crews
had big dust brushes to dust off the suits and smaller brushes to dust
camera lenses and batteries and radiators and such.

After the LM returned to lunar orbit, the crews had vacuum cleaners, the
earliest of which were just attachments to suit hoses that were designed
to use the suit circuit airflow to pull dust from the air into filters.
They weren't effective at all. Later flights used battery-powered
vacuums, IIRC, with varying degrees of success.

So, after they got back to the CSM and dumped the LM, they were pretty
well past the dust problems, right? Wrong. On several flights, dust
migrated of of the LM crew's suits and out of sample bags that weren't
tightly sealed. Dust collected in filters and on surfaces in the CM for
the rest of the flight.

And that was the norm for Apollo, which was a limited exploration with
very short stay times. Just imagine the problems that will need to be
overcome by long-stay missions and bases on the moon. And imagine how
much worse it will be on asteroids, which seem to have a similar amount
of dust but far less gravity to help it behave.

Yeah, dust is going to be problem, all right...

--

It's not the pace of life I mind; | Doug Van Dorn
it's the sudden stop at the end... |

In short - yes.

In fact, it will be a huge problem for long stay crews and , certainly, base
and mining crews.

If you look at some of the LM interior shots after moon walks, you will see
the crews face and hands absolutely covered in dust. The Apollo-17 crew
shots here are very revealing of the dust and its pervasiveness.

Dusting,vacuuming and showering will probably all be need. Possibly even
low scale electrostatic repulsiveness of dust ?

If you look at close terrestrial samples like volcanic dust, flour,fine
beach sand - any of these kicked into 'dust storms' and then inhaled by
unprotected human will definitely choke and, in most cases ,kill . Witness
volcanic eruptions like Mt St Helens, Pinatubao etc)





--


"Rusty Barton" wrote in message
...
In the 19th and early 20th century, hard rock miners developed
silicosis of the lungs due to inhaling dust produced from hard rock
mining. In a future lunar base, would repeated exposure to lunar dust
pose similar hazards? Would there be similar problems on Mars or
asteroids?




--
Rusty Barton - Antelope, California |"Every so often, I like to
| stick my head out the window,
| look up, and smile for the
| satellite picture."-Steven
Wright

Dale writes, in a previously busted thread:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:47:35 -0600, OM
om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_resear ch_facility.org wrote:

Some company has these teflon pants that are so stain resistant
that even cooking oil won't penetrate.

They made Ronald Reagan's suits, didn't they? And, I think, that
Superman-black hair lacquer he used as well.


I have a pair of those. Very fashionable, but their claim that you can
"fry an egg on them in the morning, then wear them at to a dinner party
at night" is BS. I learned that the hard way.

Dale

Well, hell, man; you're not supposed to cook an egg while you're _wearing_
'em...(;^

--
"All over, people changing their roles,
along with their overcoats;
if Adolf Hitler flew in today,
they'd send a limousine anyway!" --the clash.
__________________________________________________ _________________
Mike Flugennock, flugennock at sinkers dot org
Mike Flugennock's Mikey'zine, dubya dubya dubya dot sinkers dot org

"PP" wrote in message
...
|
| any of these kicked into 'dust storms' and then inhaled by
| unprotected human will definitely choke and, in most cases ,kill.

I tend to agree. I would expect lunar dust to have a high affinity for
moisture, making them adhere rather tenaciously to mucous membranes and
pulmonary linings. I would also expect it to be more apt to chemically bond
with tissue.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org