NRO APPROV 

RELEAd,E 1 JtTOR-469(5107-15)-11. 

Expandable Structures for Construction of 

Astronaut Transfer Tunnel 

5 FEBRUARY '1965 

Prepared by V . F HRISAR 

Solid Mechanics Department, Applied Mechanics Division 

Prepared for COMMANDER SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION 

AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND 

LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE STATION 

Los Angeles, California 

EL SEGUNDO TECHNICAL OPERATIONS e AEROSPACE CORPORATION 

CONTRACT NO. AF 04(695)7469 

PP^Orr.v 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Report No. 

TOR-469(5107-15)- 11 

• 

//, 6- -- 0,5z./ 

EXPANDABLE STRUCTURES FOR CONSTRUCTION 

OF ASTRONAUT TRANSFER TUNNEL 

Prepared by 

V. F. Hribar 

Solid Mechanics Department 

El Segundo Technical Operations 

AEROSPACE CORPORATION 

• El Segundo, California 

Contract No. AF 04(695)-469 

5 February 1965 

Prepared for 

COMMANDER SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION 

AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND 

LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE STATION 

Los Angeles, California 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Report No. 

TOR-469(5107-15)-11 

EXPANDABLE STRUCTURES FOR CONSTRUCTION 

OF ASTRONAUT TRANSFER TUNNEL 

Prepared by: 

V. F. Hribar 

Materials Section 

Solid Mechanics Department 

• 

Approved by: 

T.:. G. Maier, Head 

Solid Mechanics Department 

F. Radc if Director 

Engineering ciences Subdivision 

Applied Mechanics Division 

E, L. LaPorte, Director 

Gemini B/Titan III Program Office 

MOL Studies Directorate 

Manned Systems Division 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

ABSTRACT 

This study investigates the feasibility of using the expandable 

concept for construction of a transfer tunnel from Gemini B to the 

Manned Orbiting Laboratory. Current and advanced technology of 

expandable and/or inflatable structures and data to support its application are presented. The effect of space environment on materials 

of construction, in addition to various design configurations, properties of reinforcement, elastomers, and fabrication methods are also 

presented. 

The study indicates that current technology of expandables is 

sufficiently advanced such that the construction of an expandable 

tunnel can be realized if materials, fabrication methods, and design 

are properly chosen. A self-erectable double-wall composite consisting of a preformed foam interlayer capable of expanding (elastic 

recovery concept) is considered the best design approach. 

• iil 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. IN TR OD UC TION 1 

A. Purpose and Scope of Report 1 

B. Current Development Effort 1 

C. Sources of Information 2 

II. CURRENT TECHNOLOGY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 

EXPANDABLE STRUCTURES 3 

A. Type of Construction 3 

1. Inflatable Structures 3 

2. Foam-Rigidized 4 

3. Elastic Recovery 5 

B. Problem Areas 6 

C. Foldability and Deployment 7 

D. Rigidization . . . . 9 

E. Reinforcement Materials 9 

1. Yarns 9 

2. Uncoated Fabric 10 

3. Coated Cloths . . 10 

F. Fabrication Processes 11 

1. Airrnat Construction 11 

2. Integrally Woven Sandwich Core Construction. 12 

3. Foam Fluted Core 12. 

4. Filament Wound Construction 13 

III. SPACE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ON ELASTOMERS . . 14 

A. Ultraviolet Radiation 15 

B. Vacuum 15 

C. Space Radiation 17 

D. Temperature 18 

E. Permeability and Leakage 19 

F. Meteoroid Penetration . . . . 19 

IV. CONCLUSIONS 21 

REFERENCES 41 

iv 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

TABLES 

1. Weight Comparison Estimates for Various Composite 

Page 

Structures . . . . . . . . . ...... , 22 

2. Properties of Some. Filament Wound Pressure Vessel 

Materials 23 

3. Physical Properties for Nylon and Dacron Cloth 24 

4. Specification Properties of Finished Cloth 24 

5. Two-Ply Weight of Various Cloth-Elastomers 25 

6. Physical Properties of Dacron-Ela. stomer Coated Cloth. . 25 

7 . Properties of Airmat (Dacron Cloth) 26 

8. Mechanical Properties of Stainless Steel and Dacron Cloths. 26 

9. Mechanical Properties of Metal Wire and Stranded Yarn . . 27 

10. Weight Comparison (1b/ft ) of Coated and Uncoated Steel and 

Dacron Cloth Material 27 

11. Effects of Combined. Vacuum and Ultraviolet Radiation on 

Polymer Materials . 28 

12. Effect of Vacuum and Temperature Limits for Various 

Elastomers . . . 28 

13. Comparison of Thermal and Radiation Stability of Elastomers. 29 

14. Environmental Effect on Strength and Permeability of 

Elas tomer - Coated Fabrics 30 

15. Gas Permeability Constants for Various Elastomers at Room 

Temperature ..... . „ . . . . — 31 

16. Penetrated Weight of Target Specimens . . . ... 32 

• 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

ILLUSTRATIONS 

Figure Page 

33 1 Composite Wall Configurations 

2 Yarn Ultimate Stress Versus Temperature 34 

3 Yarn Stress-Strain Curve at Room Temperature . . . 35 

4 Yarn Strength/Weight Ratio Versus Temperature . 36 

5 Yarn Breaking-Tenacity and Strength/Weight Ratio 

Versus Temperature 37 

6 Stress Versus Strain, Dacron 52 Cloth , 38 

7 Thickness and Weight Versus Tensile Breaking Strength, 

Dacron 57 39 

8 Stiffness of Various Elastomers Over a Broad Temperature 

Range. . . — ...... . . . 40 

• 

vi 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

I, INTRODUCTION 

A. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF REPORT 

This report was prepared by the Solid Mechanics Department of the 

Applied Mechanics Division, Aerospace Corporation, in response to a 

request from the Gemini 13 - MOL Program Office to determine the 

feasibility and application of expandable structures for construction of the 

transfer tunnel. The use of expandable structure has been proposed as an 

alternative to the heat shield hatch concept 1) 

The purpose of this report is to (1) furnish information on the current 

state-of-the-art of inflatable and/or expandable structures, (2) show application of current technology for the construction of the space tunnel, (3) 

investigate materials, composites, design, and fabrication processes, 

and (4) list the problem areas in connection with the construction of the 

transfer tunnel. Only those design concepts which are applicable to the 

astronaut transfer tunnel are discussed„ 

B. CURRENT DEVELOPMENT EFFORT 

Current and advanced technology and development efforts in space 

erectables indicate a strong possibility of deploying •a tunnel which will be 

capable of withstanding internal pressure, in space, for extended periods 

without appreciable loss in pressure 2)Considerable research and 

development effort is currently being expended by the Air Force and NASA 

on expandable structures for space and ballistic reentry systems. - Development of more resistant materials to meet space environmental conditions 

is vigorously being pursued. Fabrication techniques and processes for 

construction of transfer tunnel are considered adequate and may not 

require extensive development. Current technology on expandables 

indicates that a reliable, 

constructed if materials, 

chosen. 

high performance,. inflatable structure can be 

design and fabrication techniques are properly 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• C. SOURCES OF INFORMATION 

Information contained in this report was extracted from various 

sources on current and advanced technology on expandable structures. 

Technical information is also the result of Aerospace Corporation effort 

•during the past two years on advanced systems research and planning 

studies on expandables in which the author has participated in the various 

systems and application studies of expandable structures. 

Technical information was also extracted from reports published by 

other government agencies and laboratories as well as certain private 

contractors. These include: Air Force/Research and Technology Division, 

Aeropropulsion Laboratory, Materials Laboratory; Air Force/Space 

Systems Divisian; Goodyear Aircraft Corporation, Aerospace Division; 

Narmco Research and Development, a Division of Whittaker Corporation; 

and Battelle Memorial Institute, Radiation Effects information Center. 

2 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• II.. CURRENT TECHNOLOGY FOR CONSTRUCTION 

OF EXPANDABLE STRUCTURES 

A. . TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION 

Several types of expandable structures have alreadybeen designed 

for reentry and space applications.(3, 4, 5) Thesemake use of pressure 

stabilized, foam rigidized, and self-rigidizable concepts. The specific 

design chosen for expandable structures is largely dependent on the system 

application and design requirements. A comprehensive survey on the 

various inflatable, expandable, and rigidizable structures is reported in a 

recent aerospace conference on expandable structures.

(6, 7) 

The composite wall of an inflatable structure can be fabricated from 

either organic or metallic fabric, the selection being dependent on the 

environmental conditions. The composite wall of the expandable structure 

may be fabricated by multi-ply laminations, woven seamless tubing, integrally woven core strands or cloth, or by the toroidal filament-winding 

method. Description and evaluation of these methods for various applications follows. 

1. INFLATABLE STRUCTURES - PRESSURE STABILIZED 

a. Airmat 

The development of Airmat, a sandwich structure consisting of woven 

cloth faces and a core of -Vertical threads normal to the faces, offers shape 

control not otherwise possible with inflated materials. The space between 

the double wall can also contain a preformed flexible foam to provide 

insulation and micrometeorite energy absorption. This composite structure 

has been applicable to transonic, supersonic, and reentry regimes for 

ballistics and paragliders!8, 9, 10; The flexible material also has a direct 

application to cylindrical or toroidal configurations for space application 

(Figure 1A). 

Considerable theoretical and experimental work on expandable 

structures made from organic and metallic fabric ha.s been reported. Studies 

have been made in four major categories: 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• (1) Methods of analysis of expandable fabrics and Airmat structures, 

(2) Experimental determination of the usually-orthotropic stress/ 

strain characteristics of fabrics and Airmat in various biaxial 

stress conditions, 

(3) Technology and fabrication (weaving of Airmat, spot-welding 

techniques, coating procedures, etc. ), and 

(4) Structural response to external loadings at various pressures, 

including correlation of test data and theoretical results. 

A number of other structural components, consisting of circular 

cylinders and Airmat beams and plates, have been tested under various 

loadings and pressure conditions. 

Double wall Airmat type construction is directly applicable to the 

astronaut transfer tunnel. Fabrication processes, seam joining, foaming 

reinforcement, and field repair techniques have been developed. Elastomeric materials are available for space environmental conditions for low 

orbit and limited time for various mission requirements. • b. Flexible Impregnated Cloth-High Temperature Use 

A flexible metallic filament-woven structure with a predictable 

strength, porosity, and folding endurance over a temperature range to 

about 1500° F, in combination with a flexible radiative coating, has been 

developed. (11 ) Lowleakage rate and high strength make this type of structure 

applicable to expandable structures, contoured lifting surfaces, and rigidizable aerospace structures. An internal bladder, however, would be 

required for pressure maintenance. 

2. FOAM-RIGIDIZED 

a. Expandable Self-Rigidizina Honeycomb 

This concept utilizes a flexible woven-fabric honeycomb or corrugated 

type core pre-impregnated with polyacrylic, polyurethane, or any epoxy 

plasticized resin. (12)The structure is initially flexible and can be rigidized 

after inflation. Loss of plasticizer or release of catalysts within the wall 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• structure•will cause rigidization.. This.rnethod is considered to be in a 

development phase and is not recommended for current applications. A 

sketch of this design is shown in Figure 1B. 

b. Predistributed 'Micro-encapsulation Foam 

Encapsulated resin and catalyst formulations have been developed 

which produce foam by thermal activation or gas catalysts at a prescribed 

time. The dry powder encapsulants can be predistributed within a sandwich structure in the packaged condition prior to launch. Foaming in space 

can be initiated after the structure is inflated by either of the methods described above .(9) Other rigidization processes using dry powder have been 

developed by which foaming can be initiated either by thermal activation, 

ultra violet radiation, or gas catalysts. 

3. ELASTIC RECOVERY 

a. . Composite,Multi- Ply_ 

An elastic reccvery concept which sandwiches a compressible core 

between two or more flexible facings has been developed and evaluated for 

space expandable structures!

13) The materials used for this construction 

can be folded and compressed into an extremely small container and, upon 

release, the stored potential energy of the core will expand and rigidize 

the structure. This concept :has all of the design features: required of a 

good bumper-type meteoroid- shield. The outer skin may be composed of 

a, shield of--aluminized mylar and act as a bumper as well. The foam will 

permit the shock wave to spread, as well as absorb some of the energy; 

the fabric will act as the major energy absorber. 

The composite multi-ply configuration (Figure 1D) appears to have 

many advantages over the various wall configurations that may be adaptable 

for tunnel construction.. It offers thermal as well as, micrometeorite 

protection, and it contains a. structural wall and also an outer andinner 

bladder type seal. An inner anti-scuff liner to protect the astronaut suit 

during maneuvers has also been considered. 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

A tunnel could beeEabricated by applying Dacron fabric over a. mandrel 

form, using a composite materials approach, built up layer by layer. The 

cpmposite wall shown in. Figure 113.is•about 1-1/8 inches thick. For packaging, the total thickness would be compressed to 3/16 to 1/4 inch by exhausting air from the open cell polyurethane foam by vacuum. 

Packaging densities for the wall construction shown in• Figure 1D may 

range from 20 to 25 pounds per cubic foot, based on past packaging tests. 

The•weight of the structural wall composite for either the toroidal or 

cylindrical tunnel-is estimated to be about 65 pounds; this results in a 

packaging volume requirement of 2-1/2 to 3 cubic feet. The packaging 

volume allowance given by the envelope dimensions of the Gemini/MOL 

system, for. example, indicates 3.1 cubic feet of volume available. Thus, 

the packaging requirement is consistent with the volume available.(2) 

b. Filament-Wound TCroid 

• 

Analytical studies to optimize filamentary pressure vessels have been 

performed in• which the matrix is considered to be compliant, the tension in 

the filament being the dominant load-car Eyin stress in the structure 

(14) 

A filament-wound toroidal type of pressure vessel has been constructed and 

tested. Analytical techniques can be effectively used to obtain the necessary 

design criteria for construction of a toroidal filament--wound tunnel. 

B. PROBLEM AREAS 

No significant problems are expected in the area of fabrication for 

construction of Airmat, Elan-lent winding, foam-rigidized, or composite 

multi-ply structures. Joining, seaming and attachment of the tunnel ends 

to the hatch will, however, require further d.evelopment. Final checkout 

of the compressed and packaged inflatable structure can be performed with 

pyrotechnics for abort. Explosive techniques can also be used to jettison 

the tunnel at the point of attachments. 

6 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

The effect of aerodynamic heating during launch on the materials used 

for construction of the inflatable structure should be considered. A high 

temperature phenolic fairing laminate combined with high temperature 

insulation is recommended as a thermal protective system for the packaged 

expandable tunnel. 

C. FOLDABILITY AND DEPLOYMENT 

Methods of folding various types of expandable structures have been 

developed and successfully deployed in space. Some of the developments 

include such structures as the Inflatoplane, Paraglider, the Ballute, Echo I 

and II, and the more recent ground tests of the expandable solar power 

collectors. Tests performed on.the•Inflatoplane

(4)indicate that wrinkles 

have a limited effect on Airmat pressure strength, for example. • Repeated 

folding had a negligible effect on pressure losses, whereas dead load 

resulted in permanent set and creep after approximately 300 hours at room 

temperature. A good example of folding, techniques and successful deployment has been dernonstiated. for Echo I and Echo II. The composite wall • structure of Echo I consisted of an aluminized, mylar film; for Echo II, 

mylar film was sandwiched between two layers of aluminum foil. Both 

organic and metallic cloth materials are applicable as outer skins for double 

wall sandwich construction. Metallic impregnated cloth, however, will be 

more susceptible to the effect of wrinkling, folding and strength losses than 

organic type fabrics. 

Take for example the elastic recovery concept for expandable 

structures(13) Which can be folded and compressed into an extremely small 

container. Upon release, the stored potential energy of the compacted 

.material is. sufficient to expand and rigidize the structure. Advantages of 

this system are: 

(1) High ratio of expanded volume to, packaged volume, i.e. , 

between 30:1 and 100:1. 

(2) No auxiliary force required for expansion, such as gas pressurization, chemical reaction or mechanical devices. 

(3) The method is adaptable for multiwall construction,for • meteorite and radiation protection. 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

(4) The structure is'extremely light in weight. 

(5) • Construction is based on available state-of-the-art materials 

which are compatible with space environments. 

(6) • Fabrication is adaptable to standard manufacturing processes. 

(7) The method offers reliable expansion incorporating fail-safe 

principles. 

The weight of the structural composite wall for the elastic recovery 

concept described above- would vary between 0.370 to 0.732 pounds per 

square foot (Table 1), i.e. if the composite is made of Dacron fabric and 

polyurethane foam. The deployment sequence which occurs (for. the tunnel 

design) would. be•as follows: Firs.:, the stored energy of the compressed 

foam (micrometeoroid barrier compressed for packaging) may be used to 

automatically deploy the structure to its general shape. Second, a small 

amount of (purposely) entrapped air may be used to augment deployment 

by forcing full expansion to final hape of the structure at low pressure. 

Thus, either one or both methods can be used to effect automatic deploy-

- ment of the structure. The only requirement in the deployment sequence. 

would, be the jettisoning of the cover plate, after which the structure would 

automatically deploy to final shape. 

Recent developments utilize - an expandable-foam rigidizable concept 

which was used for the construction of 44-foot diameter solar collectors 

(6, in conjunction with the Reflector Orbital Experiment . 9) In addition, an 

expandable self-rigidizable concept which is capable of a high packaging 

efficiency and positive pressure deployment has also been demonstrated(12) 

The potential of a foldable, space deployable, filament-wound pressure 

chamber capable of withstanding internal pressures up to 1110 psi has also 

been demonstrated(15) 

In summary, it car. be stated that with 'existing materials it is possible to design and fabricate a space chamber for astronaut transfer with 

a reasonably high degree of reliability. High packaging efficiencies are 

also obtainable; this, of course, will be dependent on the design and 

materials selected. 

• 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• D. RIGIDIZATION 

Several methods of rigidization have been investigated, some of 

which have been developed for various applicationS. These include: 

solvent release of plasticizer; hardening by resin/catalyst; thermal cure; 

ultra-violet cure; high energy radiation; foam in place (powder); foam in 

place (encapsulation); and strain hardening of metal foil. 

Variable density of foam can be pre-determined by formulation.. 

Rigidization can be controlled remotely, so that complete cure can be 

attained•within two to four hours using solar energy and space vacuum. 

If a high packaging density is required, a predistributed foam powder 

could he used within a sandwich structure. The foaming. process of this 

formulation could be initiated by thermal activation or release of a gas 

catalyst or solvent. Where criticality of packing density is not important, 

the elastic recovery concept which utilizes- a preformed foam as the 

sandwich material is preferred over foam-in-space reaction. 

E. REINFORCEMENT MATERIALS 

Materials which are most applicable for the astronaut inflatable 

tunnel are organic fibers, yarns, cloths, elastomers, and special coated 

cloths. Property comparisons of some filamentous materials are given 

in Table 2. Details on description of materials follows. 

1. YARNS 

The effect of temperature on the ultimate tensile strength and 

modulus of nylon, Dacron, and HT-1 fiber is given in Figures 2 and 3. Data 

shown in these curves indicate that Dacron 52 has the best all-around properties applicable for an inflatable tunnel. Dacron 52 exhibits a much higher 

strength-to-weight ratio than HT--1 for temperatures up to 350°F, as shown 

in Figure 4. The yarn breaking-tenacity and strength-to-density ratio 

(16) 

versus temperature for various fibrous materials are plotted in Figure 5. 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1.JULY 2015 

• 2. UNCOATED FABRIC 

Load-elongation curves for Dacron 52 cloth are given in Figure 6. 

A single ply of Dacron 52 has an ultimate breaking strength of 400 pounds 

per inch in the warp and 700 pounds per inch in the fill direction at 40 

percent elongation. Yarn strength to fabric strength is also compared. 

Dacron is preferred over nylon because of its higher modulus and tensile 

strength. The strength properties of plain Dacron 52 cloth as a function 

of weight and thickness are plotted in Figure 7. Physical properties and 

specifications of Dacron cloths are given in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. 

3. COATED CLOTHS 

Important considerations for selection of a coated-fabric for tunnel 

construction are: strengtei/volurne ratio, strength/weight ratio, permeability, flexibility, and packaging cha.ractersi.stics. Other considerations 

include reinforcements and degree of shear stiffness required for two-ply 

cloth laminates. Weight and physical properties of Dacron/elastomer 

coated cloth are given in Tables 5 and 6. Tensile strengths for 

Hypalon and Dacron/neoprene were found to be practically•the same. 

4. AIRMAT CLOTH 

Both organic type (Dacron or nylon) and metallic cloth (stainless 

steel,• Rene' 41, etc. ) can be used for Airmat type construction. The 

selection of reinforcment materials is usually governed by the design 

requirements, environmental factors, ease of packaging and method of 

deployment. 

Properties of Dacron cloth used for Ai.rmat construction are given 

in Table 7. If the temperature requirement exceeds 5009F, metallic 

cloth coated with a silicone ceramic frit;, • CS105 for example, can be 

effectively used., (11) 

10 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Mechanical property data for stainless steel Airmat cloth are given 

in Table 8. These data show that the ultimate tensile strengths for the 

stainless steel and Dacron cloths are about the same at room temperature. 

Ultimate tensile strength and elongation for stainless steel wire and stranded 

yarn are given in Table. 9. These results can be compared to the organic 

yarns shown in Figure 2. Single-ply Dacron cloth, coated or uncoated, is 

one-fourth the weight of an equivalent stainless steel cloth.

(17) See Table 10. 

F. FABRICATION PR OCESSES 

1. AIR IVIA T CONSTRUCTION 

• 

Since adequate i nformation is available in literature on Airmat(,3' 10) 

only a brief description regarding. its construction will be given.. Airmat 

consists of two layers (face piles) of cloth impregnated with an elastomer 

or sealant to withstand pressurization and joined by drop threads extending 

between the upper and lower fabric surfaces (Figure IA). When pressurized, 

the structure attains a predetermined shape as established by the lengths 

of the drop thread. With Airmat construction, sections can be formed in 

the shape of flat panels, contoured airfoils, or varying cross-sectional 

shapes. 

a. Foamed Airmat 

A semirigid wall structure can be constructed by filling the Airmat 

cavity with,polyurethane foam under pressure. A foam density of 1.2 

pounds per cubic foot is recommended for meteoric protection as well as a 

separator and stiffener for the Couble wall construction. 

b. Foam-in-Space Airmat 

The technique of foaming the sandwich structure in space is considered 

to be currently feasible. A predistributed resin formulation of encapsulated 

material (NCR Formulation) could be applied and foamed upon thermal 

activation (9) Initiation of the reaction could be remotely controlled. This 

method is recommended if only a high packing density is required. 

• 11 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

c. Problem Areas 

Some problems in fabrication are anticipated for the construction of a 

cylindrical Airmat transfer tunnel, especially in the joining area. Either 

Dacron or stainless steel cloth can be woven and impregnated with special 

modified elastomers such as silicone, butyl, neoprene, and Hypalon sealants. 

Foaming remotely in space is considered to be under development. The 

method of attachment of the cylindrical section to the hatch of the Gemini 

and MOL is an area of most concern. With proper design and reinfOrcement, 

no serious problems are anticipated. 

2. INTEGRALLY WOVEN SANDWICH CORE CONSTRUCTION 

A new technique has been developed which integrally weaves the core 

to the outer skins. The structure canoe made from. Dacron, glass or steel 

filamentous materials. By adapting the weaving process, three-dimensional 

cloth preforms can be fabricated into symmetrical or irregular shapes. 

Details of fabrication of this type of sandwich construction are described by 

the manufacturer(

.

5) The most significant property cf this type of construction is the web integrally woven to the facings. Peeling or delamination 

of the integrally woven skin from the core is rather difficult without causing 

core d.arnageo 

3. FOAM FLUTED CORE 

The integrally woven fluted core can be inflated and filled with a low 

density foam similar to the process described for the Airmat construction. 

The sandwich construction can be prefoamed prior to launch or foamed in 

space. If a high packing density is required, foam-in-space techniques 

can be used. A predistributed foam resin can also be used in the foaming 

process. A preformed foam sandwich structure is recommended since 

relatively high packing densities can be obtained. A-typical cross-section 

of the fluted core is shown in Figure la 

Seaming and attachment of the tube to the hatches of the space 

structures are considered critical problem areas. If longitudinal fluted 

cores are used, methods to increase hoop strength remain to be solved. • Bonded joints and reinforcement will require further development. 

12 
1111011111.1111111111111•MMIIIMM.MMMI.MM ala u . 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

4. FILAMENT WOUND CONSTRUCTION 

The construction of a cylindrical filament-wound pressure vessel for 

astronaut transfer is considered to be entirely feasible. Advanced technology of filament winding used for the development of the Minuteman and 

Polaris rocket motor chambers is applicable for the construction of the 

astronaut transfer tunnel. Packageable filament wound Dacron/polyurethane 

containers have been fabricated for operating pressures up to 560 psig. 

This type of structure is adaptable to space inflatable pressure stabilized 

structures. For this type of structure, a polyurethane foam sandwich would 

be required on the outer shell for material protection. Various sizes of 

inflatable filament-wound structures have been fabricated using glass and/ 

or Dacron filament with epoxy and elastomer type resin binders. Properties of various filamentous materials are given in Table 2'. Monolithic 

pressure vessels 3 feet in diameter by 24 feet long, and 7 feet in diameter 

by 13 feet long, with elliptical or hemispherical domes, have been constructed. The properties of the 2-foot diameter by 24-foot long Dacron/ 

neoprene filament-wound structure are as follows

(

.

2) 

Operating pressure, psig 

Design burst, psig 

Material density, lb/ft

3 

15 

45 

70 

Foam density, lb/ft- 1 to 1.2 

Packaging factor (no foam) 3 

Packaging factor (foam) 4 

Packaging density, lb/ft3 2 5 

Percent of inflated 

If a monolithic cylindrical pressure vessel with hemispherical domes 

is fila.rrient wound, it will be necessary to cut each dome and attach a segment of a filament-wound elbow to fit the hatches of the space vehicles. 

Joining of the curved section to the cylinder will require further 

development,and is a problem area. 

• 13 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1, JULY 2015 

III. • SPACE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ON ELASTOMERS 

There is, at present, some concern regarding the resistance of 

elastomeric materials in space environment. Results of recent ground 

tests on elastomeric materials subjected to combined vacuum, ultra violet 

radiation, and temperature predict 10 percent degradation (weight loss) 

for periods up to one year. It is predicted that this degradation will not 

seriously affect the strength properties of the material. 

The effect of a space environment on elastomers is discussed as 

follows: 

(1) The effect of. UV radiation. on elastomeric materials, can 

be-overcome by vapor depositing a metallic coating on 

the surface. 

(2) High energy radiation is considered more damaging than 

UV radiation. The effects of high energy radiation on 

materials such as plastics is riot considered too severe 

in the lower fringes of the VanAllen belt, however, the 

extent of deterioration•will be a function of exposure 

time. In some instances, the use of controlled high energy 

radiation is used to enhance the strength properties of 

organic polymers by radiation cross-linking. (19) 

(3) High temperature effects should not be a serious problem 

since coatings are available for thermal control. Thermal 

balance may, however, be altered since the a /€ ratio 

will change wtth time due to the erosive effect of meteoric 

impact. A foam interlay-er material will act as a thermal 

barrier in addition to protecting the structural skin from 

meteoric damage. 

(4) The effect of vacuum is not considered to be too critical 

for the time period involved.. Results indicate that the 

greatest loss of volatiles from elastomers occurs in the 

initial few hours when placed in a hard vacuum, after which • time the losses are not too significant. 

14 

• 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• (5) Protection against micrometeo:rites can be accomplished by a 

low density foam, 1. Z pounds per cubic foot, The probability 

of no penetration through the tunnel wall for a one-year period 

can be expected to approach 0,995, (2) 

To summarize, results of extensive development programs indicate 

that neoprene, butyl, polyurethane and silicone are the most promising 

elastomers for space applications. For extreme temperature range usage 

( -100°F to +"250°F) silicone appears to be the best material; its permeability, however, is not considered favorable. Polyurethanes have best 

resistance to vacuum, UV, and high energy radiation. Both Dacron/ 

neoprene and Dacron/Hycar exhibit the best resistance to permeability 

over other types of elastomers, With polyurethane showing a slightly 

higher permeability. Lo-,ver permeability values can be expected for lower 

temperatures. 

A. ULTRAVIOLET RADIA T1ON 

Ultraviolet radiation will affect only those elastomeric parts of a 

space vehicle exposed to solar radiation. Elae:,-tomeric material can be 

'protected by a thin metallic coating. Vapor-deposited aluminum, 4,000 

Angstroms thick, for example, has been considered adequate 'to protect 

mylar film and other plastic material. Tests have been conducted on the 

coatings under combined vacuum and UV exposure of 75,000 joules/cm

2 

(equivalent to 70 days of continuous exposure to solar UV). Results showed 

that only minimum degradation occurred and that an orbital life expectancy 

of one year can be expected for elastomeric materials. 

B. VACUUM 

An elastomer exposed to high vacuum quickly loses its volatile constituents. The rate will vary with the vapor pressure of the material and 

the temperature and time of expoSure: The effects of highvacuum at 

elevated temperatures on physical and mechanical properties of various 

(20,21,221,

elastomers have been thoroughly investigated, R esults of tests indicate 

that the silicone elastomer experienced no loss in strength after exposure 

to 1.2 x 10-4 mm Hg at 4500F after 4.5 hours. • 

15 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

A 60-day test or. polyurethane elastomers, foams and Dacron fabrics 

under hard vacuum conditions (10

-6 torr) was conducted which resulted in a 

negligible weight loss of plasticizer boil-off. From the results of such tests, 

it has been concluded that a one- year lifetime for such .materials under 

(18) 

vacuum conditions is entirely feasible and realistic. Degradation appears 

to be more severe with the combined effect of vacuum, temperature and UV 

radiation, Experiments have also proven that air aging at elevated temperature is more severe than high vacuum exposure, which indicates that oxygen 

under normal atmospheric conditions presents a more severe condition than 

the extreme vacuum. 

The effect of vacuum environment on the mechanical properties of 

polymeric materials in combination with ultraviolet radiation is given in 

Table 11. Tests performed at 280°F 

6 F at 5 x 10 mm Hg'for 120 hours 

resulted in a weight loss between 5.7 and .7.8 percent for the neoprene, 

butyl, silicone and polyurethane elastomers.

(2.3) The rate of weight loss was 

generally higher in the initial exposure period in: which the strength reduction 

varied between 30 and 64 percent. The resistance of elastomers to vacuum 

and UV radiation can be considerably increased by the application of metallic 

coating facing the radiation source. A vaper--deposited aluminum or aluminum powder in polyurethane resin Has proved to be effective in the coating 

for a Dacron/neoprene fabric. This material resulted in a weight loss of 

2 percent and reduction in 'tensile strength of 1.1 percent after 770 hours 

at 60o

F. It has been reported that the primary result of UV radiation in a 

vacuum is polymer cross-linking instead of, polymer degradation or scission.(24) Because of this, it was considered that some polymers should be 

more resistant to UV radiation in a space environment than in the earth's 

atmosphere. Butyl rubber, Viton A and B, and .LS-63 fluoro-silicone were 

found to be most resistant, vhereas ordinary silicone elastomer is considered to he least resistant. 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 

The effects of vacuum on temperature limits for various elasto- 

•mers

(20)are given•in Table 12. The temperature required to produce 10 

percent weight loss per year at 10- 

,

4 mm Hg indicates that silicone and 

Viton fluor° rubber are he most temperature resistant. 

C. SPACE RADIATION 

The effect of high energy radiation on eiastomeric materials is considered far more damaging than UV radiation, The only polymeric materials 

that have been found to sustain eicposure of 10 9 rads are asbestos-filled 

phenolic, polystyrene, fu an-type resins and polyvinyl carbazole.(20,25) 

Generally, the tolerance of elastomeric materials to high energy 

radiation varies between 107 to, 108 rads. For a composite structural wall 

(as shown in Figure 1D), the material that would be least sensitive to •radiation damage wouldbe polyurethane elastomer. The tolerance of this 

material (50 percent decrease in elongation) is 108 rads .(Cobalt 60 source). 

The dose absorbed by passing through the lower fringes of the Van- Allen 

belt (low energy electrons in ke \I range ) would have to be calculated and. 

related to the MOL orbit. However, estimates have already been.made 

for solar flare radiation effects (high energy protons in the MeV range) 

indicating a materials tolerance for 100 to 1000 Class 3+ flare encounters. 

As a result, electrons in the lower fringes of the Van Allen belts are not 

expected to pose any problem. Of the elastomer materials, natural rubber 

and SBR are considered to be most resistant and have a life expectance of 

about 200 hours when exposed to radiation intensities in the order of 105 

rad/hr. in vacuum.(2) 

The stability of organic polymers can be related to molecular structure and degree of cross-linkir_g!. ca) A comparison of thermal and radiation 

- stability of elastomers is presented in Table 13. •Whereas silicone is. most 

thermally resistant, it ranks fourth for radiation. resistance. Polyurethane 

ranks fourth in. temperature resistance and is regarded an excellent choice 

of material. In gen.eral, elastomers are not as resistant to radiation as 

the majority of plastics. (2 0, 26) • 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

D. TEMPERATURE 

S 

The effect of extreme temperature cycling. (+250°F to -I00°F) on 

elastomeric materials used for the transfer tunnel isnot•considered 

critical. Materials can by selected compatible with earth-orbital environment such that a fair degree of flexibility can be expected over the entire 

temperature range. Silicone elastomers, for example:, are reasonably 

flexible at -60°F and become progressively rigid as temperature is 

decreased. • A number of changes can take place in an elastc.)mer•as•a 

result of exposure to low temperature. It is important to note that these 

changes are - reversible. Returning the material composition from cryogenic to room temperature, or slightly elevated temperature, results in 

a restoration of its origival. properties The effect.of ,extremely high 

.temperature exposure on the elaseorner may, however, produce a permanent change in composition and properties of the Material.(23) 

No serious degradation of silicone material is expected for temperatures varying between -100•F to•2509 F as may be encountered for the 

transfer tunnel. High temperature gradients (that may occur due to attitude 

of the structure in space) will:not greatly affect the composite wall structure. Silicone elastomer, for example, is fairly resistant to high temperature gradients such as would be encountered at the hot/cold junctions 

caused by the shadow-direct solar impingement effect. 

For elastomeric materials, the tensile modulus increases with 

decreasing temperature and, may increase in Stiffness a hundred-fold over 

a narrow temperature range. The temperature at which' abrupt changes 

occur in the slope of property versus time is defined as the transition • 

point of a material. Around the transition temperature, the modulus of 

elasticity may increase be a factor of 400 to 1000 and the coefficient of 

(7 3) expansion could decrease by a factor of 3 or more. Since the elastomer 

composite materials can be reinforced with fibers, resistance to shatter or 

sudden bending or impact is considered to be good. The resistance to 

failure of the material at lower temperature will also be dependent on the 

rate of application of load. Stiffness of several elastomers over a broad 

18 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 

temperature range is•shown in Figure 8. Whereas silicone appears to 

have good low temperature flexibility down to -12,0°F, neoprene flexibility 

may become critical at temperatures varying from +40 to -20°F, depend- • 

ing on the chemical structure. Any material to be used. in space environment for temperatures near or below the stiffening temperature should be 

analyzed in terms of predicted component temperature and strain rate 

in addition to verification by laboratory experiments. The selection of 

elastomers that will not crystallize-or become brittle at low operating 

temperatures should also be taken into consideration. 

E. PERMEABILITY AND LEAKAGE 

Permeability is not considered to be a serious.problem, as one may 

expect, since leakage rates as low as 10

-5 pounds of gas .per ft2 -day have 

been experienced with various materials. Recent information on the 

effect of heat aging and hard vacuum exposure for Dacron with various 

elastomers is given in Table 14.. Results of tests indicate that polyurethane, neoprene,butyl and silicone elastomers all have low permeability 

rates; butyl and neoprene -elastomers being most impermeable. Dacron/ 

neoprene permeability at 11 prig increased by a factor of 300 after heat 

aging at 150°F for 100 hours. Atter vacuum exposure for 2 months at 

• 2 x 10

-4 tory, the leakage rate was increased from 0.606 x 10

-7 to 

, 

0.06 x 10 cc/cm 6 

2

isec/cm, Gas permeability constants for several 

elastorners'are-compared in Table 15. 

F. METEOROID PENETRATION 

The effect of meteoroid penetration on various types of - materials 

and composite stractureF.., has been extensively studied. An over-all 

survey of the theoretical and experimental work conducted in .the area of 

hypervelocity impact by the Air !Three, NASA, and others . has been 

reviewed by Frost .(27) A. composite double-wall construction consisting of 

a low density - polyurethane foam 1.2 to I. 5 pounds per cubic foot) sandwiched between a coated Dacron fabric is considered a good design 

approach. 

19 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 

Hypervelocity impact tests were recently conducted at Armour 

Research on polyurethane as a micrometeerite barrier. It was concluded 

that polyurethane foam is 10 tirnes as effective as single sheet aluminum 

on the basis of equal mass per 'unit area. At a projectile velocity of 

20,000 fps, it, was found that aluminum will suffer greater damage than 

an equivalent weight of fabric wall.

(28. 29) .A 1.2 pounds per cubic foot. 

barrier is considered equivalent to an aluminum sheet 0. :36 cm thick 

(0,96 gm/cm2) with respect to penetration resistance. Considering the 

0.36 cm thickness of alerain-urn, the corresponding critical particle mass 

for penetration is 6. 5 x 10 The penetrating particle flux corresponding to the critical. 11-S is Z. 3 n 10 3 particles/ft2

-day. The 

probability then of no peeett:ati:.ons through the tunnel wall for a one-year 

period may exceed 0,995e(2) 

A summary of penetrated weight of several target specimens by 

pyrex projectiles of app: oximately equal NrCiOCitieS (20, 000 ft/sec) is 

given in Table 16. The order of specimens lists the most resistant 

specimen first and subsequent specimens in a descending order of 

resistance. The total penetrated weight of the specimens seems to 

decrease as the bumper and spacer masses decrease to some finite 

value. 

Hypervelocity pal'icle impact tests conducted on a space shelter 

indicated that the double-wail construction offers >0.995 probability of 

no penetration on a 310-square foot area for 400 days (18) For tunnel 

design, the outer surface could consist of organic, glass or metallic 

cloth. The bumper (metal or glass) acts to fragment the particle upon 

impact, whereas the foam spacer acts as an energy absorber and arrests 

the particles by vaporization. 

The effect of meteoric impact on a fahric/elastomer skin under 

stress should also be considered. Catastrophic rupture could occur if 

the material is notch sensitive and has a low tear resistance. 

• 

29 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

IV. CONCLUSIONS 

Results of this study indicate that the application of inflatable'and/or 

expandable type structures for construction of an astronaut transfer tunnel 

is feasible. Materials and fabrication methods have been devised to meet 

the design requirements and space environment for•a limited time period. 

Current technology is sufficiently advanced such that the construction of 

an expandable tunnel can be realized if materials, fabrication methods, 

and design are properly chosen. A self-erectable double-wall composite 

consisting of a preformed foam interlayer capable of expanding (elastic 

recovery concept) is considered tne best design approach for immediate 

application. Future expandable systems for space application may 

utilize foam-in-place methods. 

The effect of space environment on materials used for construction 

does not appear to be as critical as anticipated. for the proposed orbiting 

altitude and time periods considered. Some degradation of elastomeric 

type materials is expected; however, the extent of deterioration will not 

seriously impair the strength property of materials proposed for tunnel 

construction. Life expectancy for the most resistant materials used for 

the tunnel is estimated between 6 and 12 months. 

' High packaging efficiency is obtainable for inflatable structures 

such that a composite two inches thick can be depressed to a reasonably 

small package. Weight opc the composite wall structure may vary between 

0.370 and 0.732 pounds per square foot excluding attachments. 

Fabrication and deployment methods for the proposed tunnel do not 

impose any restrictions regarding size or geometry. Methods of repairing 

and sealing defects such:as small pinholes or cracks to prevent leakage 

of internal pressure during inflatioreare readily available. 

21 • 
lb /ftz 

0.164 

0.100 

0.080 

0.001 

0.025 

0.370 

(A) Airmat 

Dacron/celastorner, 52 oz Ard2 , two-ply 

Foam, polyurethane, 1.2 lb/ft

3 

Bladder pressure seal 

Thermal coating, 

Aluminum foil bumper, 1.8 mil 

0.382 

0.100 

0.080 

9 .002 

0.025 

0.589 

(B) Integrally Woven Structure 

- Dacron/elastomer, 52 oz /yd

2 

Foam- , polyurethane, 1.2 lb/f 3 

Bladder pressure seal 

Thermal coating, 1 mil - 

Aluminum bumper, 1.8 mil 

0.289 

0.407 

(C) Filament Wound 

Dacron/elastomer plus coating, foam 

and bladder 

Stainless steel/elastomer plus 

coating and bladder 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• Table 1. Weight Comparison Estimates for 

Various Composite Structures. 

• 

Stainless steel cloth (100 x 100 x 0.0045) 0.532 • 

two-ply plus coating, foam and bladder 

• Fiberglass ielastorner plus coating, 0.732 

foam and bladder 

• 22 
3 

F /p tu 

Sp. Strength 

106in. 

0 

(r> 

C) 

r.,:i 

crc. fti 

rv) 

t•q7 

tr) N . 

(4.1 

1.t) 

u'D 

Ni 

N N 

Cr' 

n 

-I Cr 

• 

,r4 t, o

0 •-` ) '—) g t. 

f•x-i CJrn 

. 0 

r-i 

i"..) 

't t„,n , 0 

''''' • 

tr, 

'''''' 

0 

en 

0 

NI, 

,7f4 

‘.0 

CD 

in 

_._ 

•,-.1 ..-4 

Tr 

(NI 

0.3 

(V) 

0 

Irl 

0 

C 

<44 

0 -4 ...... . 

• 

imi 

-0 0 •-■ 

N. 

....., C) 'xi co r--- 

0 

0 

.-.• 

0 

`,.., 

-,-4 

0 

:.... 

srrt 

0 

''''' 

,,,O 

C) 

trl 

N 

CO 

co 

a- 

....o Cr's 

o in 

1.t) 

0 

T-r6 • r, 

1..71.1 rrg \ C 

0 

,-.4 sr-, 

,r.,.• . • 

s 

N N 

1-,..x 

C.'. 

- cs, 0 

,-/ 

oN 

Ni 

LID 

Its■ 

Ln 

e-I 

r•A 

r0 

(r) 

rs.1 

ifl 

. •wne.) • .., • CL - (i) r4 

Q.) ,f3 

C.) --+ 

• : " 

: 

•,..4 

sztl CD 

CD 

;..--, 

7.r.1 -

0 

C) 

c 

k.,7 C 

CD 

Cr' 

0 

CD .0 0 

0" 

C 

0 

in 

C) 

C) 

es) Co 

0 

C) ,r\a 

cc 

0 

CD 

o .ati 

N 

C 

esa 

co 

CD 

0 

''..1' 

• -4 o Cl4 

E.' to (xi 

4•-• L"0'..' 

...., 

. .4 

r -I 0.).. 

, 

: 0 

in 

',.2, 

0 

c. 0 -,--i 

I C) 

CD Co 

c •^ 

0 

0 

i'' 

— 

0 

0 

`34 ,..-3 

0 

0 NNi 

0 

0 

TV Ml 

0 CD 7t 

0 IP 

tri 

0 ).1) 

vcr 

0 LC1 

711' 

0..) 

0 

cti 

1-1 

Cla

0 

I 

I..1 ■—, 

7-4 '1") 

0 

65 

0 

1.11 

't 

--, d 

.-4 

1.4 

0 

-,,, cd 

. .- 

: 0 

., 

(I) 

. E 

' 

■ 

.ri — ..., 

r 

A 

'-' e -4 ;>, ;,a, 

''''' 

1 

;.1.: :

, 

..,-4 

0 

1., 

,.-r, 

- 

in 

0 cij 

,--1 

0 

ra 

,t, c. 

O's 

 Vi 

a) 

;-I 

,....." 

r-I 

(1) 

4- C.0 

Z 0 ..0 

1" 

(Si 

0 

o N 

4.1 

C 

;,_,-4 

P'S 

z 

0 - 

1-1 

0 

In 

.,..., 

P.4 

...., 

r3 c, 

! 1 

In 

CI) 

,..■ 1) •,•4 4 

0 Lti 

al E 5-.. 

c c, 

co ..-, 

t) 

sl 

al 

.:: 1 1

J 

;3 

"-, , 0 

rld 

0 

0 

at 

ra 

, 

x 

cl, fzi 

01 0 

cd 

0 

1 

w 

0 A4 

4.1 1 

f), 

Cd 

9--1 0 

.14 

Cs 

0, 

1 Lo 

›,-.. 

X 

ra:s 

[11 i 

0 

0 ;-4 

0 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 Wound Pressure Ve ssel Mate rials 

O 

H 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• Table 3.. Physical Properties for Nylon and Dacron Cloth 

(Reference 3 ).. 

Pro •ert 

1 

Nylon 

Code 3594 

• Dacron 

• Code 9004 

Weight, oz /yd2 12.0 12.9 

Tensile; lb/in., warp/fill 625/625 600/600 

Wealie 2. x 2 basket plain 

Yarn type 300 52 

Yarn size, denier 1050 1100 

Yarn ply- , warp /fill 1 /1 1/1 

Yarn/inch, warp /fill 40 /40 42 /36 

• 

Table 4. Specification Properties of Finished Cloth 

(Reference :3).. 

.:.22.ecification Wellintiton Sears 

Pro•ert 'Lai_ I Tie II T _ e I T .e II 

Weight, oz /ydz 

9 + 0.5 12 + 0.7 9.8 12.9 

Tensile, lb /in. (min) I (min) . 

Warp 400 500 466 553 

Fill 600 800 649 882 

Elongation ?max) (max) 

Warp 25 25 t4.8 20.8 

Fill 25 25 21.2 19.5 

Count 

Warp Not , 

:Tecified 

Not 

specified 

48 58 

Fill \Tot 

specified] 

Not . 

specified 

37 49 

24 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• Table 5. Two-Ply Weight of Various Cloth- Elastomers 

(Reference 18) 

Cloth-Elastorner Fabric Weit, oz lvd2 Fabric Thickness, inch 

Nylon-Neoprene 43.5 0.0566 

Nylon- Butyl 40.4 0.0570 

Nylon-Hypalon 47.0 0.0599 

Dacron-Neoprene 52.2 0.0560 

Table 6. Physical Properties of Dacron-Elastomer Coated Cloth . 

(Reference 18). 

Tests . 

TD -icron. 52 

1iTri7 -----ITYD'F 

Dacron Neoprene Dacron-H Avalon 

RT 100°F RT 1.00F 

Strip Tensile, lb/in. 

Warp 830 825 762 794 782 

Fill 832 

• Permeability 

750 666 837 677 

cc /m2 /24 hr atmos. - — -•-- 142 131 67 61 

Weight, oz/yd.2 18.:75 39.1 37.6 

Thickness, in.. ! 0,030 0.047 0.047 

Density, lb ift3 52 69.4 72.8 

1 1 

25 

• 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Table 7. Properties of Airmat (Dacron Cloth) 

(Reference IS). 

Prue...ill Proaert 

Material 

Yarn type 

Yarn size, denier 

Yarn filaments 

Yarn twist, turnslin. 

Ult. tensile strength, 

lb /in. 

Warp 

Fill 

Dacron 

51 

2.20 

50 

7• 

200 

115 

Yarn ply 

Weave 

Yarns /in., warp/fill 

Weight, oz/yd2

, face 

• ply 

Pile or drop threads, 

, 

yarns ,, n.2. i 

Burst strength, psi 

1 

Plain 

112/50 

5.0 

25 

50 

Table 8. Mechanical Properties of Stainless Steel and 

Dacron Cloths (Reference 17). 

— 

Strength —1" --.E.longation. 

Material Direction lb/in. 1 Percent 

Type 304 Stainless Steel 

100 x 100 x 0.004 Wart' . 129 23.0 

Monofilarnent Cloth Fill 167 10.9 

Type 304 Stainless Steel 

100 x 100 x 7(0.0016 in. 

diameter) 

Warp 136 31.8 

Stranded Yarn Cloth Fill 163 17.2 

Type 304 Stainless Steel 

98 x 98 x 0.004 Warp 153 14.5 

Airmat Faces Fill i60 16.3 

(Basket Weave) 

N363A10 Dacron Warp 170 20.0 

Fill 150 20.0 

26 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Table .9 . Mechanical Properties of Metal Wire and Stranded Yarn 

(Reference 17). 

Material 

Ult. Tensile 

StretlatILLksi E x 106 si Ult. Elongation, % 

• Type 304 Stainless Steel (warp) 4.4 

• 

Airmat Wire 0.0045 in. 

diameter 

115,330 (fill) 10/5 33.8 

Type 304 Stainless Steel 130,640 45.6 

Stranded Yarn 

7 x 0.0016 

Table 10. Weight Comparison (1b/ft) of Coated and Uncoated 

Steel and Dacron Cloth Material (Reference 17). 

--- 

Material ,._ Uncoated Coated 

Elastomer Weight 

Total •er .1 

Single Ply 

Standard. Cloth (SS) 0.134 0.218 0.083 0.083 

Stranded Cloth (SS) 0.122 0.222 0.100 . 0.100 

Dacron 0,283 0.049 0.021 0.021 

3-inch Airmat (SS) 0.328 0.516 0.188 0.094 

Two-ply (SS) 

Stranded Cloth 0,2.70 0.425 0.155 0.078 

3-inch Airmat 0.598 0.926 0.082 

• SS = stainless steel 

27 
490 °F 

400 °F 

300-450 °F 

o • 

G50. F 

200°F 

Z. Effect of Vacuumand Temperature Limits for 

Various Elastomers (Reference 2:0). 

Table 

Temperature Required for 10% 

Weight Loss Der Year at 10°4 mmHam. 

Vitonfluoro rubber 

Silicone 

Buna-N 

Butyl 

Neoprene 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 201.5 

Table 11. Effects of Combined Vacuum and Ultraviolet Radiation on 

Polymer Materials (Reference 23). 

Material 

--- 

Loss in. WILigtt, % 

,1.1.13Pq.1.11 V4Vaaa 

. 

Loss in Ultimate Tensile 

Strength, % 

wo e•me 14.11,..a1.•11*.a . 

Neoprene 7. 8 30 • 

B4t5ii 6. 6 57 

Silicone 5. 6 67 

Urethane 5. 7 64 

Aluminized Dacron/Neoprene 1. 94 I. 1 

28. 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

t).D On, N 1(1 CC .0 Cl NI N 

In 

P4 

CI) 

0 

cd 

r4 

44-1 

0 

U) 

0 

173 

Cd 

1:4 

-4-41 N t•4-Jf '414 CO QS o .1.44 

co 00 a.) co a) CO co co co C' 0- 

o Cl C o CD CD 0 0 40 

.44-4 4.4-4 

X X X X ;‹ X X X X 

N 0 • N N 1.11 fl IP 

414 N ^14 er) t4 `41Cfl — 4 

Cl o in (7) o Lr., in ino 

Lc, N CO 

-41■ .11 c'f) re) rfl r'1 4.4'1 N 

it -0 it a, 0 • 4_, o) .._, 

F to :4 1-, (u r, 

• VI 

4-4 

Z 

r-1 . CO 

Lo U 0 ,.., >•- ,..., !

— 

V. >-, 

., 

›, 

I. 

Z 

Cl) 

7-,

0 7.. ,....4 0 

c) 0 '..›, :II 0 0 

,.., —, ., a. —04 co ct ..., ,..: 4....: 

41 CI) :::i., <( ,..- 04 14 `Z. at cf) 

73 

• 

r.:1 

. 0 0 

CO 

r. i 

no 

•,-, '-`4 c..! u) 

0 U 444 4-4 ..i.i 4.4 Q) 

rd rd 0 

Natur

al ru

bber 

• 
r0 — 

N 

0 0 • • 1-'1 

• N N LeD CC 

co C 4 00 

■ 

i 

o 

I 

r 

 ' CD 

N X 

NV '-ON sO 

CD N on 0 

rn rn 00 N 

0 .O.. mn N 00 C ) 

I 

1 

2. . I 

....•ma:a.volgewaml■•• 

03 

r- 

+ + 

U.-1 

' 0 - 

■. 

• CO N N CO 0 

i 

0 

t 

-'C ,0 1 1 

'C-' o i 

4+ + 1 N' ; 

0 

r4 

C' c!.; sO 

O'n ro. CD 

un 03 CO on • C) Np en N N CD 

0 -- • - en 

+4 4- I 

CD 

\ r.r. 

6') In 00 00 

• CD 

• rn 00' 0 4. 

u 

(1) 

o 

Z 

(1; 

04 

W 

O 

• 

X 

(2, 

C 

o 

,.., 

u 

• z 

C) 

0 1-, 0 

cd 0 

it) 03 

N 

rn 

op N1 

i I ++ 

00 U-

.0 cr1 

N 

CD 

01 

01 

050 1..r) 1 

i : 

N t 1 ,n ,n -I. - I 

+ 

• 

-4- 0 4- 1 1 ) I I I I I 

‘1.) 

; 

0 

X 

in 1-r1 

00 r: (7 

C) 

rn NI .v.r ■ un CD 

(I) 

• 

Of 

• Ci 01, I 

_ ,, _ • _ • 

CD 

x 

;z3 ••.0 o-1 

01 on on -4•• 

....: ...I: 

re., 

0 0 Pq IS ...... 

4a' 

0 

0 , U 

Ik./ I 

1 

..4 ,-. 

‘, t: (I 

a) 

1-• 

0 0 

4-, ,., 

■-I 

O t 

U 

.6.1 . , 

f . .4 --.... a4 a) -4- -10 u — 0 U 04 xrj" r-' -, -0 -' u .-0 0 •-• 

(...) ! 0..! ..C.0 . 0 1 .4 . ftico . tziNV cd 11 u) . 

I, ■ 

•■■i 

.., X 

4..... , .. '''. , 0 i ...., 

•.. 

. . 

....../. , .4 

.,.., co .4 ,t.'",0 I 00 4, >-0N1 Of) E ° to 44 1.4 ba 

• 0-.1 r. 'C l to "C 3) re 0 ho t ,d c . 

0! - a) 0 ;:l 0' a) rd Nj C) ,-- ,, 1 - 

004 ' -. '`' 00 k 0.., C.; 0, 7-' - 4 0 .4 1_, iy, ' cu rx, 

...., • (1,•,-' k -, ;-• 1-, -, .- ::-- : ,,, ,, r•-• _. p• 1-, - , -- d...) 0:1 -, --.. ;••, ._, •L, ;-, __, 4 --- U 

an a, r.r) ,3 -, 4.., rci -• 0 1J lA. ) (ti v., 4) ‘,/ ., 1, 0 ›. (ii V) MT ..+1 ,b, R5 ■-.1 It V 

' V ; 4 ' - Un .. • -‘ c..) ,••■ NI t, 11.; V 

.---: 1;01, ,-. ;'.S'• 04 ,..- 1,4 p ----• 

, r.-_ ,..."' . ,_., a) u ,. 0 •Y 1+4 ra4 0 ---' Xon 

$-■ .(,), .d) . 'et -, 41) ,..•,0 , m rd t., 

6 " 

t.t -2 

..a-; a, (t „ ba •... 

.: x 0 0 ‘11 77, ,d ,a), Q. 

C) 0) . ni k 00) 0.1 *... /A '2.1 

< 1 k Cr) k 0, il. X .--, ■ fl) 0,,u, , 1. H 0. a, X V- M H al a, 

sar-saaneCe..Irftwwwwww. _ 

0 ..• 

0 

(.) 

N) en r4

• -

0 + + 

Lin CO Lr 

• in 

xr■ 

N oo 

00 V- r-- • N -' 

0 I 1 

N 

• 

03 

OD rn CN 

N ts1 CD 

on r- 03 50 

4f'3 .44 

30 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Table 15. Gas Permeability Cons-tants for 

Various Elastomers at Room 

Temperature* 

x107 cm2 

sec atm 

High Polymer . N 2 0

2 Air H2 cO 2 He CH4 

Natural rubber 2 2 1 3 3 3 2 

SBR - 0.5 1 0.7 3 9 2 2 

Butyl '0.08 0.05 0.. 0.4 0.2 0.9 --- 

Hypalon --- - -- 0.7 -- --- --- --- 

Neoprene 0. t 0.3 0. i 1 2 0.6 0.2 

Buna N** 0.02 0.07 0,1 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.04 

Thiokol_.. FA - -- 0.02 --- 0.3 --- --- --- 

Silicone - 70 10 - 70 200 100 --- 

Poly FBA -- - 2 - -- --- --- --- 

Urethane 0.04 0.1 0.05 --- --- 

Viten __,. --- 0.007 --- --- 

Polyethylene 0:09 0.3 0.8 --- 0.6 --- 

Teflon 0.02 0.8 - 60 --- 

Water Vapor Permeability Constants x 108 measured in gm /hr /cm2

/cm 

Natural rubber 7 

SBR 10 

Neoprene -. 

Polysulfide 0.2 

*

Values are given only to one significant figure because of variation in 

permeability caused by compounding variables. 

** 

This is a specific elastomer compounded for impermeability. 

Most Buna N's have permeability constants comparable to those given • 

for Neoprene. 

Source: SWRT. Also References 23.and 25. 

• 31. 
CD 

szt4 

IC 

cn Ga

cci U 

0 

a) 20,000 fps 

Cci u 

E 

mi 

II 9 II Projectile density 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

E 0 0 so 0 0, co CC) 

(•6 t‘l 

0 0 C7) 0 • 0 CD CD 

5-1 

)) 7.4 N.1 

.v•-■ 

(5 

0 

0 

0 

C 

r^, 

0 

0 

CD 

0 

C) 

0 0 

C` 

0 

CD 

■•-••■i 

(NI e4 N.1 r\I CD 

Cr ••••••4 

C) 

)-, ■ 

0) 

C.) <...1 r, r, + ,- 

I.,:', a, ---, 1: 4 r-, Q ,-, 

,.-, 

CO 1., ' d d u;) M rd d 

a). 0

,.. 

 0 0 

,,-1 -C 4-9 4

0 0 0 

4., -4 4-4 4-1 

d • .) :-) 

' % ai fai 

• 

a) 

CC 

1:21. 

CC 

d 

H 

Ga 

;-1 

as 

• ■-■ • 

c0 '.7:) 'c,7.-) P. C14 04 

Fle

xible P 

0 CD 0 C.) 

rv", 

1,4 

.C) N.) 

:71 

{.1 

• 

F 

: 

—f 

I 

0 

ci 

a) 

, 

1 

:',... 

re • ; 

'i, 

o 

Z 

a) 

F-1 

e--4 

i.".:: 

— 

1 

r•-I 0 

0.0 (1 

;•••4 ' '-' 

0 77-1 

..o CC' 

14 

0 

.., 

N:14 

a) O 

a) 

04 

dT‘ 

0 

).., 

U 

d 

a) 

CC) 

a) 

•••,-1 

Q.) 

P-9 N N rs4 

•14 

32 

• 
Airmat 

(Pressure-. T-r 

stabilized . 

or rigidized) 

( A ) 

III 

N. Sealant 

Bladder 

(B) Fluted. Core 

(Rigidized) 

Sealant 

Bladde.c 

Shield 

-- Outer Wall 

Web, Integrally Woven. 

-- Foam 

Inner Wall 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

Thermal Coating 

Shielding 

Outer Wall 

Strand 

Foam 

Inner Wall 

----- Thermal Coating 

,,-- Thermal Coating 

(C) Filament Wound --- „..--. 

---- "- Shield 

(pressure, _, 

Foam 

stabilized (iccI6Mq.Z5xl.acekk=cx=i4 

. ----. Hoop ..-' 

or rigid zed .''• ------ Longitudinal 

• 'IsaietX- -f5A1t14T65- ML-- FiZTZ- A/L • ' 

'--------------------:::1 Hoop 

. . --Sealant Bladder 

Thermal Coating 

Film Laminate 

• (D) Composite 

Multi-ply 

Laminate 

Micrometecrite Barrier 

Foam, 1.2 lb/ft3 

Structural Wall 

ZiCr-YOCX=r-tar-/..717= .27JCIP' Multi-ply Dacron Fabric 

-- Intermediate Sealant • 

Inner Sealant 

Anti-scuff Liner for 

Astronaut Suit 

Figure 1. Cor-pcsitr- Vi- ali Cortfigt tions 

33 

• 
WHINE 

• ..- 

• 

"MI 

dIIpIIjI

'Of 

lehMiffild 

El III opilimmlin 

:;iP-1,4 

•dj1 

a:. :: 

. tatr 

• 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
1.1...111 Ill .LrquElsora= 

11111111111:::::::::: 1 I La" ill illailir"MMEI 

.--, 

a: II

IMUNIOLIONMEAS: 9:14.11:: ::: Hese: 

2**' 11!4311 :0111i71:::8m. 

 NMI 

Fr • kla issairshammuommosom 

.. 11'41 : :111111g; :: EII...

.. 

F: 40111 Ilsoldrb,„_ 

icalualimill ... . MOM E914:::REAMINEMONMONM 

' 

1 11.111....... Iwo= 

i 

. 

iIII ....... ........... II I. 411111111 

. ...... . ......... . ... 

.. 

• ......... .0.... ....... 

. el!'" !! ........ 

• .111......!!!!!!.. 

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 

11; IM 

8. PIM 

• • • 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

! 

v - 

: 

• tt • 

. .4 

4 • 

r ■ . 

• 

:-.. ..:'.:•-- '-'5;. : -.,T,.75:i-j,_-:p-:., - j._, 1 7 !-. 4 

1::_:....::_ - _7' 77 - ::'.: :',' .1: .:- : ... - .:': :: ::.:: 7: 1:: ::: 7 _117: : • : 7 .:•2:- J7 . _., ' ::::.: _ 

,--- , '... 

. • n 

- .J.-, ;r.4. • ! "_i ' _ 

— H --.- 

---------77 il'17- ' ' . i 

• , ,!.... 

ame 1 '44 • r4-- 

...itO 

II 

Ise 

!=4!•,. .; 

1241;:, 

•L n-. •r! 

,77!::217.7g1_7 .7 

: 

•t 71-1...1: 

. • • 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 

.., , , ...... 

until Nil ,: I Imp' 1 •____ ill 1- -I. mairo -... 

megl.:=2.1=1.1 

.......eme

■...... 

1.=1:...= 

. ........ 14 .. 1 I _, 

It LW r=." 

_i_ nalloN 

I " wpm., 

ingi•MTIE SES 

inimmetwomum 

••••••••11•01.0. 

=11.•31=1". Kommer 

..../■•411•••• 

111H1 

WI ,; 

"fitnra 

• 

m 

• a _0•• 

•••••••112Mlf 

mow.. 

Vera 

, 

•Or. ''' • d

re f a.... IgiAN11•11111••••1=1

"•11074:2:: 

. 

2'. H " rifiumh 

- 1 

- I ... M. Ignp1111M 

• • 1.1••••••• • ...iimernaiSISE -2.- "=" 

''' - ' 1 ging 

•••••• 

- " 6911HIS 

MI: IM. 

MINIM 

M•INIMI 

r 

I. 1--'" 

1-• 

• 

. 

4 

. 

••••••••••••■• 1:1_,.. 

' 

—I mis .10•11.111.1•••■• 

t MM. 

111:111. 

IMAM, 

"1." 

M.P. 

11112:1121 

i''-'' 

• 4111: .21 :•••••:••• .3":103==iii - • -, 

_d2L• AM' fir — . s — .. 

t....e..n........ 

:Romosons , .....—: ,ffli_ ,..,4- ..., dm 

,..t. t r, : -2'S' ...p......!!!! 

----SEE -... 4 . -.:.:::=E ..-A-- 

• 1 :::,,T. ; ...W. 11•11111••■••••1 

wommosmoo. 

1 ante===eas A. '0-4, 

••••••••••■••.■•• -7 kompswomm... 

.. 

u u . 1 • Till011""===1: 

......1.1••••••••••••■••• 

..,:t ii• a . • 

_Lsi i 

1- 

• :' 1=0 

•••■••••••••• 

••

■•• 

---'trl ish-: Is 

mMN -- 

INIMMI 

•-. 

:: : immenum plMfill -1- • 

. iMMIII • 

I? 

• 111111 

11111 

1 4 J .... 

• 1' " --` 4. 

. . 

..7 ' ' 

R 

. 

••• ............ 

s isrss=—r.r.r. 

' 

iai...1.

10=

...

= 

• _, • ,,,_ , MHO Ea 

• 

j I 4 2(- . ' ■- ,.. , -., 1■- 

- 

,I 

- 

.

•a7

• 

, 

, :•

" if 

. 

. i lt 

-- ' _,_, _ Man 10•

■••••••= 

_ . 

.... .„ 11 

.........__ ............. 

il 

ill II V,. R Ii36...,, ■ _+. ' i" ---'-' 

...., 

• T.' 

.. , . 1 ....u.. -t i4 ,i ,_ Tr id '±- 

III NNE 

....mmg.. 

ROOMS 

, •• ,... 

, ,_ -1- 117.1 -,,_ 

' - 

... -.- 

. 

i I • MINNIMMIMMIIINI 

. ._ 717,, ;.::' • r.71::-:t=',71 :r1,- -. - II •-•,■, L.,. 

-- 

' 

' 

1....•• •, ■• 

• 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• .J 
: 2 

- • 

14 

.., , 

-2, 

_ ---.. 

4 ir 

' t 

wina,ms r'" ±, • 

'11111 I. • . 

, : • Ltif 

L Hl 

S: tt:: -• 

, , 

■ ■f- , i , j . I ,-, 

, ■ ., 

- -; 

1.1 1 -:'”, .--r,r :Z-..:_. i ..,1:' :-..-- -,F",-,.A5'1--) ..•: - - 

, .---,- ..,...„ , ,,I,$,,..„'.. -- 1 :-4: 7 ' •:, , . -t',1:14:1-:,' , j 

! ,'4.--, - --. ill--1: 7' r . ;7.-1 - .?:- 

Th

. 

;.; 

7." 

- 4- --,— -1-=': 

1 • ■ :,,t, ,- ..1. 41. --,- , l .,:::-Ti-,,,,,,,...,: 1_1, .r_ ; 

1. • 

-"t+ ' ,-',-;,-,-,-,-, --'-' • - '''-''''tii.:-$4' '''' . - 

•••■ ... ommiNMom AV , titra:ile i fi,L_ M 

••• 

■ _ 

OMMMWOMMYWWW 0 ' 

•••••••■••••••■•• 

... _ Mi ... ._„, .4......-1,-, 

7.1 

, 

121 Tr 

4 4 4. 

24 

-r I 

• ;A- 

• .

. •

" . 

-.' :tf, • 

• 

. 

, 

'11 

■ 

0.1■••••••••••••■ 

V . 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE .1 JULY 2015 

._ ..,_ . .r . 

II.; 1 111:11";!1'11 •:::!:':!!::::: 

22228111:!NII:11::•• 

,,- ■-.:-,-r: • as4414 NI" 1::: :.:: :::::..414.■•••• No 

• !"1 ,,t — "*. v. ' .'. - ra z -f-.;;,-..„ • ' fl - " Simi. ne • - 

1 

,4- di_ NnimmIlligialliiii • ••• 

. '...i- . 

I Illil Illiii 111111111111111111 

1 II 11 +41 N 1.111!ssal 1111 .. _1111111111IM 

1 11111. • .32 III 1.121111:11111:12'21 : 

r. E • • 2,.. • : "' • ! ::c:; ". :' IC::: ' 

:___,

, 

_ 

-1-,--i T' 111.1Misl !ft! II 

-'- 4-- .1. igilffir• :PI _ 

/i ll 4- iiiiiitillii: 

.,,•4 , . 

tifiliiiiii 

.,, • ..: 

....q; - 111 _ ____,.._ ..,,,, t. • 

-_, ., _,.._ 

, ! 1 

.... 

!MIIIII 

4.4-I. .• 

1111111,1111 

.. 

.. Mom. 

row.. ".1:11 

411.. .4 

, f . 

. 

II. ::•6 .onma... : •1•••=.1 4 

: 

s - • • sh.gg 

... 1 .."... ...n 

-,-, . Er. waq11:1 . 41 . . • 

I. r. 

..-, MS Ma Simmxmama 

..' '...i 1:11J ' • 

••••••• ••••••■•• 

- 

'7-7 411011111 li=n; 10 WPM. 

IMMION.O0 

- ±.L- .1_." . mu ::0•1 . .0. 

'14 , 

.. * MO .... 4 ,. 

. 1 - L.::: - 

Illilawn 

• ••::: 

. . _ 

. 

'.-- VP 2 

' 

„ ,-•'-1-,.. , 1 1 

mom. 

' .1, . — - ':.: ---_:";:. ---1.-'-t-.:r•-,. :-17.1 --- _r:::s_.„ ,,... rdirt:iii 

. - . =_,__,,,:-.......f.___:-..,,,,,q,-,,. .: , • ... ...._•.... 

is. .... 4 . • 

...•-. 

44 ' 12" //i1111 ■

■ -, 

-, 

+t'4.-- ,Irimow VINPVI 

' I:1MT:: 

. 

.. _._. .. . 

_::: _._ ..._,.... r.,_:__ ___ __ 7_7:: unitci 

 .,. 

. _ -.=-:,',-„;;.-_,.--- .--- ,t,.:--------- •-,--------; - %,i 

ill 

. 

• .., - t.__:=1- ._,__ ,. . 

1 e IWO 

:-.Li L':. 31:-. F..... ' --,:::":±'-77445 

•••••••••••••• 

c)..- ,,. 11::::: 

oso• 

UP 

1..17.:.:,z7'-:::::::71.:--.::_:::., 

::.__.,:t.. 

t 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

L 

• r... 

I +q•el......: 1,1:114:1,: . -a 
0 

u.. rt ,Y„ o o 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

* 

; 

4' 

r.1 

0 

S-4 

+ 

L,I 

• a) 

• U 

S•-■ 

(41) 4-4 

cd 11.) 

'411 C:4 

• cr, 

tic 0 

() 

0 

0 "-i rj 

oJ 4 IZ 

; 

dal 0 

— 0 

kI 

IIMINIMIMMINIVIrtel7.9•Vac AZT . •sr taie.l.c.i • 

41143.tik' 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• P EP3INCE3 

1. M, G. Wolfe,. MOL Stu,v Fa sk Status Report Astronaut Transfer 

Briefiu Char, TOG 764, 10-1. Aerospace Corporation, 

12-February 1964,. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

Private Commur'icatior won. L, Juric,b, Goodyear Aerospace 

Corporation, 4 l\ taroh 

Pa,raglider Development Program, Plvlile IIA, Volume I, GER 10778, 

Goodyear Aircraft Corporation, Septe:c.ner 1962. 

A Lrms,t Material ,F ve:ug o iOe- :',?ac(--.L_Inllatorlane, GER 10270, 

Good7ear Aircraft Corporation, 30 Juno 

"Integrally Woven Fluted_ CorC, Panel", Technical Bulletin, 

R.iymond Development Ind trie s, 

Conference on. A:::ro3pace: Rructureo, Air Force Aeropropulsion and F i,rat FyoFrni.cs Labcratories, 22-24 October 1963. 

V., F. Hribar, Trip Reoo:ct Confe:eucn on Aerospace Eua.ndable 

Structures, IOC (.3 -176i,::./1?-748, ZA.e.L.:space Corporation. 

Material Repo-t p--e"- ' - - sem ST r; (-.3 1391 NAS 

91714T4, i\IOrthlinrice.n A 7: IA. o n , Inc 30 November 1963. 

Hribar, Colloctors -.ROE , A TM64(4710- 17)-1, 

Rni s pa ce Cc:p:nion, 1 De.0 C i 963. 

F. B. Sandgren and J. T, is, 'Ikoplication of Inflated Expandable Struc t ilr E 3 ;: r t a in 1..-zsr:try", ARS Structural 

Design of Space Vehicles Conference, Santa Barbara, 6 - 8 April 

1960, 

11. New and•IMproved Materials for Expandable Structures, Phase III- - 

1z. e ETa y Coatliats , 11=- SID 11. t 17, October 1963. 

12. I. Russell and 

for A er °space 

St. ru.c Ear es., Ad 

Laboratories, 

E,. .Dunri.ng, 

Stzuot°3 " 

C A erc, 

Da yton, Ohl .o 

"Expandable Self-Rigidizable Honeycomb 

-,:;oeferenceon Act ()space :Expandable 

propulsion and Flight Dynamics 

22-24 October 1963. 

13. B. C. s tic - l'.17,--::1:o„F:t for Eaparniable Space 

Structures, Comerenoe on Aerospace :Expandable Structures, Air 

Force Aeropropuision anal :FHght Dyna roles- Laboratories, Dayton, 

Ohio, 22-24. Cktoi.,, er 1963, 

is 

srammultiketWOMMIT T. I: 7:7 "...1 lIffalllinill111111111111111•11■1 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 

14. Hans. Schuerch, A tia lytical Design fo:. Optimum Filamentary Pressure 

'Vessels", A.C.A.A Launch and Space Shell Structures Conference, 1-3 

April 1963. 

15. O. P. Dahlke, ILA. Method for Manufacturing Foldable Reinforced 

Conta.iners", A31).A Launch and Space -Vehicle Shell Conference, 

Pajrn Springs 1 •-7 April. All.3. 

16. Proposer for Spacecraft 

Engines, NASA_ (5:51 -6i, -12b9. Goodyear Aircraft Corporation, 30 January 1962 

17. • Analytical and Ex1,erim€--..13.-...11. of Coated :Metal Fabric 

Expandable Structure for e r pa„c e•A tions,• A SD- TDR - 542, 

November 1963. 

18. Proposal for Design For Lunar Survival Cache, GAC-120451, 

Goodyear Airc caL C 0 7.E)arat..L.:.,-_,25 .',11.1" 19 62-. 

19. :D. L Cooper,. `B.adia lion Processing', • Internal Science and 

20. Space Materials Handbook. Lockheed Missiles and- Space Company, 

January f962 -("Cont:rac t i6 47 )-673). 

21. Research on ElaStafrle:r. and Compliar•d: Materials for Aerospace 

Sealants, ASD22. • Coating for the A.e.:-:osixa.ce mdronmeni, ASD-INADD- TR-60-773, 

9-1C November leO 

23. Handbook of on .E.:aston. - -ieric•Materials•T_Jsed IrnAerospace 

9t) 2 

24.. ,'`,-lexanle.s:, et al, The Ultra.vioL:.., De,s5adation of Organic -

Coating 3 , U tDL) 6 - 7 e rt II a tI U.S. Naval Research 

La y, • De c e p.b r 1966. 

25. N. J. :Broadway- , ,.he Zifect of Nuclear Radiation on Elastomeric • 

and Plastic Materials, REIC Report 3 Radiation Effects Information 

Cent., Battelle Acn.loriai May 1958. 

26. Development of High. Temperature Resj.stant Rubber Compounds, 

N'T.157-Ta 

4"/. 

C. 
KIRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

• 

27. V. C. Frost,Space Structurces in 1:11:: h,i.,-,teoroid Environment, IOC 

A63- 764A.- iS 6 0 , A rospace A.-. C rporation, 14 March T 9 63 

28. B, W. Reynolc7,s,EZ:leLi c.,f 1,170erveloc:I.,1 Particle Impact on 

,. ...._ 

Composite Materials to Exuandable Str:ture Applications, GER 

106T3, Goodyear Col poi-anon, August 1962. 

29. B. W. Reynolds and R. H. Emmons, "A New System of Protection 

from Hypervelocity Particles", Sixth Hpervelocity Impact Symposium, 

30 April -- 1, Z Maa 963, 

30, Expandable Space Structure, Interim Report (1 November to 31 

Ja.uar y I 94 ) iASE 21 roiect 7 9•13a and Mr. .1368), 

4 

1,1,14 LW' " • l..,1611r-T 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

DIS • R IBU TION 

- Internal 

3. C. Batteiger/SBO A. G. Nor e m 

J. B. Be rthele t C. L. Olson 

E. N. Borson M. T. O'Shaughnes sy 

J. M. Brown C. R . Pullen. 

S. L, Channon SB 0 W F. Radcliffe 

F. R. Fleming W. C. Riley 

V. C. Frost W. F. Roberts 

R. B. Glasser . S. Rubin 

B. Henry E. R. Ryder, 

It. H. Herndon H. Silva 

:E, E.. Hoeke/SBO I. Slaughter 

E. Hove Smallen 

E. C, Kendall Steinman 

J. C. Krisiias H. C. Sullivan / SBO 

- D. H. Leeds 1. M. - Weeks 

C. A. Lindley D. E. Wilkins 

K. O. Ludi': Willers 

Ma g e H. Williams 

H. 1\laier C. Wolfe 

McCielland 

rE: . T. Mya. OWS ki 

44 

• 
NRO APPROVED. FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2(115 

DISTRIBUTION:: (Continued) • External 

Lt. Col. W. W. Penn (SS3,49`'; 

Maj. J. C. Fischer (SSTR) 

Maj. W. J. filer (SSTR) 

Lt. Col. L.,D..Parso s SS.ML) 

Paul Prepp (SSTR) 

Air Force Aeropropulsion Laboratories; 

RTD 

Wright-Patters .AFB, Ohio 

Attn: Lt, A, J. Zapenti (APET) 

Mr. Fred Forbes (APFT) 

.McDonnell Aircraft Corporation 

P0, Box 516 

St. Louis, Missouri 

Attn: Mr, D. A. Liebel 

Goodyear Aerospace Corporation 

Akron 15, Ohio 

Attn: Mr. L. Jurich 

Goodyear Aerospace Corporation 

P.O. Box 3339, Terminal Annex 

Los Angeles 54, California 

Attn: Mr. F. B. Hollander