Talk:Long Duration Exposure Facility

Results

This article needs a section on the findings of the experiment. The Singing Badger 13:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes please! I just came here to say the same thing, nearly six years to the day later. Credulity (talk) 18:40, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Just started to research the sources and am working on expanding it with emphasis on the biological experiments. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:32, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

This [1] 30 MB PDF has 1991 symposium procedings (488 pages). - Rod57 (talk) 16:23, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Could add

• The electrical systems were entirely powered by the LiSO2 batteries. solar cells only there for tests.
  • apart from the Low-Temperature Heat Pipe Experiment Package (HEPP) (S1001) (see results ref above - p233)
  • The batteries are variously described as Lithium Sulfide, Lithium sulfate, or LiSO₂ - very strange.
• One long face (Row 3) was designated 'leading', and the other (Row 9) 'trailing' [2] - How was this orientation maintained ?
  • post-retrieval data indicated it yawed about 10° towards row 10
• Which experiments benefited from the longer duration, and which suffered ?
  • One (A0187) with covers that closed after 11 months reopened them later [3]

• "Five environment exposure control canisters (EECC) were flown on LDEF." ... S1002," M0006, S0010 and the two M0003 canisters" ref p336

• "Four standard lithium range safety batteries were used to power the TCSE. These batteries were developed for the Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) range

safety system." ref p368

- Rod57 (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Lots of answers and information about results here: Stuckey, W.K. (February 15, 1993). "Lessons Learned from the Long Duration Exposure Facility" (PDF). -- ke4roh (talk) 19:26, 15 May 2017 (UTC)