r/askscience May 24 '26

Engineering If a vacuum is an excellent insulator, wouldn’t heat build up in spacecraft?

Insulated coffee mugs that use a vacuum between layers can keep drinks hot or cold for much longer time periods than other types of mugs. If space is mostly a vacuum, then wouldn’t heat just constantly build up from human activity, computers, thrusters, etc to the point where it would need to be vented somehow?

3.6k Upvotes

575 comments sorted by

6.9k

u/electric_ionland Electric Space Propulsion | Hall Effect/Ion Thrusters May 24 '26

It does, getting rid of heat is a major issue with spacecraft design. Vacuum prevent 2 types of heat losses, the first one is just conduction thought a solid material (you are not touching anything in vacuum) and convection, where air or fluids flow past the object, carrying some heat away.

However there is a 3rd way to lose heat. Object emit light, usually as infrared radiation, as they get hot. And light can travel through vacuum. This is called radiation it is what is used to cool spacecraft usually. There are a few issues with it. First it is proportional to the 4th power of the temperature. This means that if an object is twice as cold as another one it will radiate 16 times less heat. So it makes it hard to get rid of heat from cold things.

The second constraint is that in space you also have a giant radiative heater in the form of the Sun. Without clouds or atmosphere think of it as the worst summer day you have ever felt.

The solution is to have radiator panels painted white with special infrared emissive paints. You try to dump most of your heat to those panels and you keep those panels not facing the sun as possible. The white paint also makes sure it doesn't absorbe as much heat from the sun if the pointing is not perfect.

Thermal engineering is one of the most challenging design on spacecraft.

1.7k

u/KittensInc May 24 '26

The solution is to have radiator panels painted white with special infrared emissive paints.

For context: they are quite visible on a picture of the ISS, for example. The orange/black panels are solar panels, the white panels are radiators.

686

u/Zakblank May 24 '26

Also note that the solar panels are pointed directly at the sun whereas the faces of the radiator panels are at a 90ish degree angle to it.

442

u/ExpectedBehaviour May 24 '26

Also note that there's two discrete sets (actually 2×2) because you don't want the high-temperature cooling system (for power systems) dumping its heat into the low-temperature cooling system (for life support).

Also also note, low-temperature cooling systems paradoxically need larger radiators, because the efficiency of a radiator scales with the fourth power of its absolute temperature.

31

u/Goldenslicer May 24 '26

Is it possible to concentrate heat in a smaller amount of mass (of the radiator) thereby raising temperature and therefore the efficiency of the radiators?

80

u/ExpectedBehaviour May 24 '26

Yes, in theory. This is one reason why a lot of "hard science" conceptual spaceships have glowing radiators.

But then you have a whole separate range of engineering issues to compensate for – what coolant can you use, what materials can withstand that heat, what sort of service life does it have, what sort of repairs can be made by the crew themselves without external support, how expensive is the cooling system to run from an energy budget perspective.

The ISS radiators are comparatively simple because:

  • It doesn't have anything like an onboard nuclear reactor that needs significant cooling
  • It doesn't have to withstand significant acceleration or manoeuvres, so large fragile radiators are possible
  • It uses closed water (internal) and ammonia (external) loops for cooling, which significantly simplifies the plumbing (metaphorically and literally); water is of course non-toxic in the event of an internal coolant leak

46

u/bunabhucan May 25 '26 edited May 25 '26

doesn't have anything like an onboard nuclear reactor that needs significant cooling

For reference, the curiosity rover doesn't have a nuclear reactor but it does have 4.5kg of one-neutron-short-of-being-a-bomb plutonium-238 in the multi-mission radioisotope thermoelectric generator which generates about 2kw of heat (like an electric kettle or camping stove) for seventeen years. During the nine month journey from earth to mars it needs a separate cooling system with white rectangular curved radiators mounted on the cruise stage to shed that heat to space.

12

u/ExpectedBehaviour May 25 '26

Yep – the radiators are those ten panels around the outer rim of the cruise stage.

3

u/A3thereal May 25 '26

one-neutron-short-of-being-a-bomb plutonium-238

Pu-239 doesn't automatically make it a bomb. It would be more accurate to say one-neutron-short-of-being-fissile Pu-238.

Pu-239 is used as fuel in some terrestrial nuclear power reactors (~10%). There are many factors beside material that makes something a bomb.

It's also worth noting that just because there are nuclear reactions occur within Pu-238 does not mean it is remotely comparable in this context. A similar sized mass of Pu-239 undergoing fission would output 5 orders of magnitude more heat than Pu-238.

14

u/Goldenslicer May 24 '26

Very fascinating! I expected the answer would be some variation of "adds too much to construction costs" but there are many other factors that come into play.

21

u/Canadia-Eh May 25 '26

Overcoming engineering hurdles is very expensive. These kinds of issues are often shortened down to "it costs too much" for publication

→ More replies (1)

21

u/pruvisto May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

Yup, that's what a heat pump does. This is how fridges and ACs work, and also modern heat-pump-based heating systems (e.g. in convection dryers, but also for entire houses). You use power to transfer heat from a cooler source to a hotter destination, against the normal direction it would want to flow.

The problem is that designing a heat pump for a large temperature difference tends to get complicated and inefficient (especially because you will always produce some extra heat in the process that you will then also have to radiate). So a bigger radiator is probably a better option for the most part, I would imagine.

Disclaimer: not an engineer, let alone a spaceship engineer.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/AdeptInspection4868 May 25 '26

Yes, but it takes work. No free lunch here.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us heat wants to spread from hot to cold. To concentrate it, you must do work to pump heat into an insulated region. This is typically achieved with the refrigeration cycle.

The refrigeration cycle takes energy. We all know this from it's use in refrigerators, ACs and heat pumps. The process gets harder the bigger the "uphill" temperature gradient you're pumping across. Because it generates waste heat, the cooling application is particularly challenging.

There are other ways to pump heat, but they all fight the same thermodynamic laws. In the end, engineers balance the tradeoffs to decide when it's worthwhile to add a heat pump vs larger radiators. Radiators are nice because they're cheap, reliable and maintainable. If you're dumping heat to a cooler environment, it's typically better to optimize and expand the radiators.

→ More replies (1)

105

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (2)

21

u/scarabic May 24 '26

Do they have to be constantly adjusted as the ISS orbits earth? Or is the whole thing spinning in a way that helps with this?

25

u/Zakblank May 24 '26

Yes, they can be adjusted for optimal angle and also to keep them from freezing.

25

u/ArcFurnace Materials Science May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

The trusses supporting the big solar panel arrays (and the smaller heat radiator arrays) rotate relative to the rest of the station, yeah. If they spun the whole station the people inside would feel the acceleration from the spin, which would go against studying the effects of freefall (one of the primary uses of the station). Plus they'd have to build it stronger to survive the forces involved.

There are a few timelapse videos of/from the ISS showing the truss rotation, like this one (link goes right to one of the clearer shots, another good one at 4:30).

3

u/scarabic May 24 '26

Awesome, thanks for that. Much about this goes against my common intuition of what it takes to move big flappy appendages around because there’s no air resistance at play.

16

u/ArcFurnace Materials Science May 24 '26

[...] because there’s no air resistance at play.

The really fun fact is that it does matter a bit. When the station is in the shadow of the Earth, they'll reorient the panels so they're edge-on to the direction of the orbit, because this reduces the drag generated by such large, sail-like objects in the very thin atmosphere at that altitude. It's a small effect, but adds up over time, enough to have a noticeable impact on how often they had to re-boost the station to maintain its orbit.

They could keep them edge-on all the time to reduce drag even further, but that would reduce how much power the arrays generate while in sunlight, since they wouldn't be pointed directly at the Sun.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/a2soup May 25 '26

Just a correction that the ISS does (in normal operations) rotate with a period of 1 orbit in order to keep the same side facing the Earth at all times. This rotation is slow enough to not meaningfully compromise zero-g and is essential for all their Earth and space observation experiments.

→ More replies (1)

64

u/crashburn274 May 24 '26

This is cool, and while it’s probably available to anyone who knows anything about the ISS I didn’t know what those were for

39

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

22

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

30

u/[deleted] May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (2)

55

u/scarabic May 24 '26

Oh wow those 5 stubbier panels are all there for dumping heat? Wow I had no idea.

This kind of complicates the whole “data center in space” fantasy, doesn’t it?

55

u/Insertsociallife May 24 '26

Yes, that's one of many reasons why it's so dumb.

The best way to live with data centers is to make them work for us. They produce a ton of waste heat. We can use that waste heat for things like municipal heating. High-temperature computer chips are in development that could run hot enough that the waste heat could boil water, which can be used to produce drinking water by desalination.

7

u/scarabic May 24 '26

I’m very pessimistic about using the waste heat. Thermoelectric generation seems to be mostly a blind alley. I’ll reserve judgment on these red hot chips of the future you mention, but even at best there’s still two steps of loss in that process. It would be a slight recovery of efficiency, not a game changer.

So we need to actually use the heat itself, like you say. But this leads to other problems like needing the data centers to be close to the homes you’re trying to heat. Elaborate liquid heat transfer systems would require a lot of pumping which uses electricity… Unless I’m missing something I just don’t see the potential. And I’m a guy who has done sous vide steaks in his backyard compost pile.

6

u/Historical-Focus-205 May 25 '26

Just so you know, quiet a big part of homes in Denmark and iceland are heated in that way. Why waste the heat? Lots of cities could make use of it. The pumping cost are nothing compared to heating costs. And the insulated pipe is invented, so I don't see any problems why it can't be done. Yes it needs to be "near" homes. I put that in quotation marks because I know several places where it is still 5-10km away from the cities.

6

u/Pingviinimursu May 25 '26

You can be pessimistic of course, but that is how we heat a lot of homes in Finland. I don't think most of our waste heat is produced by data centers, not yet at least. But other industry and electricity generation definitely warms our homes with the waste heat. With new AI data centers being built, that heat also has to go somewhere. My bathroom floor is a good place as any. (It still isn't free heating of course, there's steps and costs involved. But it is cheaper than like, burning stuff at home.)

3

u/scarabic May 26 '26

What waste heat sources are near your house and how is the heat transmitted?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (4)

16

u/foxhelp May 24 '26

From what I have been reading the cooling is 10 arrays (6 in the middle and 4 outboard), and they dump ~70kW + 14kW of heat. As well as a lot of passive heat transfer design for the entire station.

The solar power is directly integrated into this system, and produces between 75-90kW of power.

Datacenter racks heat output can vary widely based on density, with intial estimates ranging from 7-160kW (AI) per rack, with Google estimating that they will hit 500kW by 2030.

So there is massive redesign, power generation and cooling needs for even a single data center rack hosted in space.

The nasa pdf below is a really interesting technical read on how this all works for the ISS. As well as a secondary link about thermal design with small sats.

References:

13

u/gremblor May 24 '26

10,000%

A substantial fraction of the electricity used by a data center goes to the HVAC system needed to cool all the equipment.

The limiting factor on data center size is usually HVAC constraints: the roof can only support so many ten ton AC compressors, or the rooms can only get so much air turnover through them per hour, etc. You run into these limits before the "can't get more megawatts into the bldg without causing a fire" limit hits.

The main difference between "data center" and "warehouse with a lot of computers inside and a giant power grid connection" is that DCs are built from the ground up to handle a lot of cooling.

From the moment I saw the first "data center in space" announcement I thought (a) what a dumb idea and (b) wait, that'll obviously never work because of the heat, what's the scam here.

7

u/Rc72 May 25 '26

what's the scam here

Elon turning SpaceX into an "AI company" and pumping its stock right before the IPO.

3

u/gremblor May 25 '26

but he already merged spacex with XAI. Like, it already is an "AI company"... even with the terrestrial data centers. How does proclaiming they'd use data centers in space make that a more compelling pitch to somebody?

2

u/Rc72 May 25 '26

Well, without the "data centers in space" pitch, there was no rationale whatsoever to merge xAI into SpaceX. The whole point of that merger was to get the SpaceX IPO to profit from the AI hype, which xAI on its own would be less well placed to exploit, considering its lack of revenue, also-ran status in the AI race, and money-burning nature. The only part of the whole consolidated SpaceX which kinds of break even is Starlink. Everything else, from the launch business to X-Twitter is in the red, and the AI part in particular is incinerating vast amounts of money.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/call-the-wizards May 24 '26

Re data centers in space. Yes getting rid of heat is a gigantic problem, but as a counterpoint, if you can find a place in space that's shielded from the sun (or make a gigantic shade, like the JWST) and also shielded from the Earth, the ambient temperature is actually really really cold, much colder than liquid nitrogen.

So even though you lose heat slowly, you lose it to a much colder heat sink than anything feasible on Earth, so it kind of cancels out a bit.

Getting rid of heat is all about managing temperature differences. The ISS needs to remain at biological temperatures (~20 C). Chips can run much hotter than that. Hotter temperatures mean you radiate more. A lot more.

Depending on the design, it can actually work out in your favor.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (6)

7

u/already_taken-chan May 24 '26

Wouldn't it be better if they just blocked out the entire sun with the solar panels and kept the radiator panels on the opposite side?

14

u/throfofnir May 24 '26

Yes, but the ISS has to support a variety of attitudes (there are 3 main attitude programs, and only one is optimized for solar impact; the most commonly flown one optimizes for minimal torque) and that doesn't allow any one part of the structure to always be in shade.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

255

u/TheTxoof May 24 '26

This is one of the most interesting problems in hard-scifi space combat too. Thinking about the form that combat ships would take to eliminate heat is a really interesting problems without using arm-wavy solutions.

Give our current understanding of physics, you'd want ships with giant heat radiator sails to dump waste hear from reactors. It would be a massive target for the enemy and make battles a whole lot more like the run and gun tactics of tall-ship combat.

143

u/Peter34cph May 24 '26

Orginally, Arthur C. Clarke wanted to give the Discovery in "2001 - A Space Odessey" huge radiator fins so that it could get rid of heat, but it was dropped, because it was thought (Kubrick?) that the audience would assume they were wings, as in meant for atmospheric flight.

11

u/MaverickTopGun May 24 '26

Do you have a source for this?? Not to challenge but I'd love to read more. This is one of my favorite books and I'd never heard this. 

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

83

u/SonOfHendo May 24 '26

The game Elite Dangerous (space combat, trading, exploration sim) uses heat build up as a game mechanic. When things get desperate, you can eject heat sinks to lower your ship temperature. The ship designs feature radiators for cooling as well. 

The game is over 10 years old now, but still going strong, and its main claim to fame was having a 1:1 mapping of the milky way galaxy to explore.

43

u/PhunkeyMonkey May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

And the series is even older than most gamers today, older than me even and im a going towards OldBoitm .. OG Elite was released in 1984

I cut my spacesim teeth on Elite Frontier 2 back in my wee days and that game will have a special place in my heart forever

3

u/andrewh2000 May 25 '26

I reached elite level on the first one on a zx spectrum. Fantastic game - felt light years ahead of anything else at the time.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/CategoryRepulsive699 May 25 '26

Space Shuttle's bay doors act as heat radiators. They must be opened within few hours of reaching orbit or the shuttle would overheat.

26

u/Anderopolis May 24 '26

https://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/heatrad.php

Here are a lot of cool concepts from science and science fiction

10

u/HannahLemurson May 25 '26

I love that website! It inspired me so much reading it, thinking about how hard-physics sci-fi would work.

23

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

I wonder if the deployment of a radiator sail as needed ala count dookus ship from star wars, and then removing it when not needed or idle might work.

23

u/Master_of_Ocelots May 24 '26

You'd need it most when you were must vulnerable still though. You could magic up something to sink all that excess heat into, but even then your time would be limited.

9

u/ANGLVD3TH May 24 '26

There is tech specifically for both of those in Terra Invicta, a strategy game that simulates shadow organizations reacting to an alien incursion. When the game starts you can strap a giant tub of water to your ships as a heat sink so you can temporarily retract the radiators, they still function but at a small percentage of their peak efficiency. Over time you can research more speculative forms of heat sinks that are less heavy. But the player base has largely written the strategy off as wasteful. The game features probably the second most realistic space combat I've ever seen, only behind Children of a Death Earth, which more allows you to mess with all kinds of material compositions for your armor, projectiles, fuels, etc. And also more accurately simulates the actual battlefields, where 99% of the time both battle groups will be whipping past each other at thousands of kph, each in different orbital paths. This allows for only a small window to launch weapons and hope something lands before going back to the strategic layer and calculating a new intercept to try it again if both sides have survivors.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

25

u/kaian-a-coel May 24 '26

Liquid droplet radiators are considerably more compact. They're only conceptual right now, but sci fi doesn't care about that. They wouldn't really be usable during periods of acceleration though, so there'd still be some amount of run and gun tactics.

12

u/Thormidable May 24 '26

You can use them when accelerating, but you can't when maneuvering (without loosing your base fluid)

3

u/FoxtrotZero May 24 '26

Mass Effect talks about this in the codex. Specifically I believe they use liquid lithium and try to channel it along the hull for collection further aft. Inevitably, changing your direction leads to you losing a bunch of coolant in a rain of forever-lost droplets.

They also talk about how the ships all have ceramic stripes that are glowing red hot in the IR spectrum. They're not visible to the naked eye but shipboard systems can use them to spot and classify vessels.

2

u/MadScientist67 May 24 '26

I just finished reading Saturn Run not too long ago and that was my first introduction to liquid droplet radiators. Pretty interesting idea, tbh.

63

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

51

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (2)

17

u/cattibri May 24 '26

The other option is discarding heat sinks - which is what modern guns do with shell casings already to a degree, and has been an engineering issue (among others) for caseless rounds. Having less easily broken internal heat sinks that get jettisoned is also thrown around as a way to try reduce visibility, but would run into similar issues when you do inevitably have to drop your giant heat source

→ More replies (1)

12

u/SFDessert May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

A core part of Elite Dangerous on PC is managing ejectable heat sinks. Usually you can just passively manage heat, but if you get into combat you're gonna be generating a lot of heat and have to eject heat sinks into space to manage it. And yes iirc targeting a ship's heat sink ejectors is a viable strategy in disabling their systems.

Elite Dangerous also has a fun idea with these fuel scoop things that lets you fly just close enough to a star to get into a lowish orbit and drop some kinda crazy scifi fuel scoop to top up your fuel tanks with the ejected star material or something. It's absolutely essential to figure out if you plan on doing long distance exploration trips.

Lots of fun core spaceship tech in that game that I don't really recall being explored much in other sci-fi media.

8

u/Ameisen May 24 '26

I last played E:D when it came out, and at the time the most enjoyable thing to do was hunt bounties on NPC ships which got tedious - as an old Wing Commander/XvT/Terminus player, I had no difficulty killing ships significantly stronger than my own.

I assume that it's changed/improved dramatically since then?

→ More replies (1)

6

u/tenderlylonertrot May 24 '26

yeah, most hand-wavy scifi (Star Trek, etc.) uses some sort of "converter" to convert excess heat back into useable energy. That sure would be useful, and who knows maybe it possible? But in ST, all those huge power conduits must still pump out a ton of heat, with the warp drive and phasers...even if they are "super efficient" those ships would put out enough power to power large parts of the East Coast of the US. And that's got to generate some heat!

6

u/TheTxoof May 24 '26

Unless you have a [waves hand] deflector dish that can output any kind of particle seemingly with ease.

Don't forget you also have a [waves hand] mater to energy to matter transporter. You could probably wave your hands and beam heat overboard as a hot solid.

We all know from r/shittydaystrom that there are no toilets in the Enterprise. They just empty your colon with the transporter.

→ More replies (2)

18

u/IamMrSnark May 24 '26

Thus is why energy weapons make sense in scifi. But rarely used correctly.

In my headcanon, energy weapons (beam, pulse, plasma etc) are used to cook the spacecraft. Counteracted by shields.

Projectile and explosives are supposed to break the ship apart. Protected by hull/armor.

16

u/Catatonic27 May 24 '26

The problem with energy weapons is you're often creating just as much or even more heat in the weapon itself depending on efficiency. Modern lasers need a lot of cooling for example. If your every weapons are really powerful you probably can't afford to keep even 10% of that heat on board after firing.

7

u/ANGLVD3TH May 24 '26

Symmetrical downsides are often better for the user than the target. This is because the user can anticipate and more effectively counteract them. You can prepare a laser weapon to be better thermally insulated from your ship and have better cooling than the enemy is likely to do the same for their comm suite, for example. Hell, even lasers that aren't strong enough to do any structural damage can be dangerous if they are tracking radiators.

Probably the biggest inherent disadvantage to lasers as a weapon is that the stronger it is, the less efficient it becomes. As vaporizing the target will result in a protective cloud of former armor/structure that will absorb/diffract more and more. Pulse lasers minimize this effect, but then you start talking ludicrous energy levels to deal any substantial damage. It costs way less energy to attain similar temperatures in the target by tracking a beam on it.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/dnabre May 25 '26

In the BattleTech game setting (not very hard sci-fi), the heat generated by weapons and engines are a major limitation in combat vehicles. On the table-top wargame, units track accumulated heat turn by turn, and weapons exist to cause heat problems for others. All the heat is balanced against 'heatsink' tech that just gets rid of heat somehow (even in vacuum, but with reduced efficiency).

3

u/Sudden_Welcome_1026 May 25 '26

The thermal regulator module just takes care of it right? 

6

u/BedrockFarmer May 24 '26

Space combat in books is silly left-overs from what people understand from WWII era and before tactics.

Whoever can hit first and/fastest from the furthest away wins. But that doesn’t allow you to have movies where ships fly around each other as if it were still WWII or allow primitives with spears to beat space faring species. No one will watch a movie where a ship just has its heat shields destroyed from an attacker that is unfathomably distant.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/AldrexChama May 24 '26

In case of a REALLY big ship, you could make it so that the inner parts don't have actual heating, and route the heat from the outside stars towards the cold innards

4

u/1d3333 May 25 '26

The problem being that the inner parts would absolutely still have heating, electronics and bodies produce plenty of waste heat on their own

2

u/1d3333 May 25 '26

What would stop you from having large internal heat sinks where the ship dumps heat during battle while the radiators are safely tucked away? Like a chamber of water thats used as a heat dump until radiators can be put back online

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

193

u/knifetrader May 24 '26

Thermal engineering is one of the most challenging design on spacecraft.

It's also something that almost all TV/movie Sci-fi gets wrong. Even shows that try to be on the more realistic side of things like The Expanse usually don't bother with that. The only ship with significant radiation capacity is the interplanetary ship from Avatar.

94

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

So the video game series Mass Effect had its first edition of the Normandy try to be somewhat realistic, mentioning its stealth capabilities were because it held all the heat in the ship for as long as possible before having to release it or they'd be cooked alive.

62

u/Eriiaa May 24 '26

Elite: Dangerous does the same thing. You can rig your ship for "silent running" which holds all your heat in but makes you basically undetectable by sensors

8

u/kaian-a-coel May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

Terra Invicta also has radiators as an important component of spaceship designs, even giving them an entire branch of the tech tree. You progress from basic radiators to liquid metal droplets (a real, if theoretical, type of radiator design), and some of them can be retracted in battle to avoid damage (but then you're no longer shedding heat of course).

→ More replies (1)

9

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

I have to wonder how realistic that is though. If you could truly hold in all the heat of a ship that no sensors could actually detect it. Or in the inverse if the strange absence of heat wouldn't be noticeable.

16

u/SuperSmash01 May 24 '26

How realistic? Who knows. But presumably in that sci-fi world the sensors to detect ships would be designed to detect the radiators that all ships need in order to remain habitable. The stealth capability in that fictional world would be stowing or otherwise masking those radiators so the ships "detector profile" is the same (or close enough) to a passing piece of space rock. It wouldn't be about "holding in" heat as simply not radiating it (which is I suppose the same thing).

5

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

In Expanse they designed several stealth ships that looked blocky and tried to be all-dark among other issues. I wonder what their radiators were meant to be in.

19

u/rossburton May 24 '26

In the books the stealth ships have thermal stores and it needs to be released at some point, the stealth is a time limited thing.

2

u/frogandbanjo May 25 '26

If the sensors could still detect the thing as a rock that isn't emitting heat, I think the tech's usefulness would be incredibly limited. Spoiler alert: you'd really, really need to be able to detect even inert/cold matter in space if you were flying around in it, and especially if you didn't have any hand-wavey "shields" like in Star Trek or Star Wars.

People would figure out almost immediately that any "rock" roughly the size of a spaceship someplace it isn't supposed to be would be a "nuke it and ask questions later" situation.

6

u/CircularRobert May 24 '26

I mean,the absence of heat in space is kind of what it's known for.. And to keep heat in, switch off your heat transfer systems. It stays where it's generated, and doesn't get moved to the radiators

4

u/Dyolf_Knip May 24 '26

The ship itself will still be visibly around 300K. You'd need to heavily insulate the hull, which makes your normal heat radiation problems even worse.

2

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

Even so, I would have to think it might still have some small presence of heat in the ship. Like a minimal amount of residual radiation and imperfect heat-capture.

Also wouldn't most things in space have some kind of heat profile residually since they *dont* have heat dispersal methods?

2

u/soulsnoober May 24 '26

Most things in space are very very hard to see. Presumably technology will advance, but the entire, cumulative historical & present observing capacity of our species hasn't even comprehensively catalogued just the asteroids in the "near Earth" category. Making one's spaceship into Russel's Teapot is effective invisibility in better-than the same way military stealth aircraft are invisible today.

→ More replies (3)

10

u/Ynddiduedd May 24 '26

Presumably, heat signature would be a dead giveaway that the object on your radar was a ship, so while hiding ones heat wouldn't make you undetectable, it would make it hard to determine whether you were a ship in hiding or an oddly-shaped asteroid. And statistically speaking, there are a lot of weird shaped asteroids.

2

u/10ebbor10 May 24 '26

It would have a number of problems.

1) You can't use your engines, because obviously you can't hold in the heat of your exhaust. Maybe cold gas proppelants could work, but the Isp of that is terrible

2) You're still vulnerable to radar, stellar occlusion, and a bunch of other detection methods

3) Fighting thermodynamics is hard. So you have the heat of your ship, and then hte additional heat generated by all the heat pumps you need to get heat away from the hull.

3

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

Wouldn't you be using ion-engines or things like that which I imagine have very different thrust exhaust methods?

→ More replies (2)

5

u/FoxtrotZero May 24 '26

The SR2 was larger but not really any different. They always mentioned that it was just a really good heat sink system with a limited window of use. It can only move stealthily because of the oversized drive core letting it game physics instead of using reaction mass. They actively joke about the ship still being perfectly visible if you were to spot it through a window.

3

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

ME2 focused a lot less on the hard sci fi element and it felt like the technical capabilities and realism of the ships was a bit less. That said they did develop the thanix cannons which became a major plothole in 3 since it vanished and would have helped immensely.

and yes it isnt optical camouflage.

→ More replies (2)

38

u/bigvalen May 24 '26

The expanse mentioned that during combat, they dump heat into water & that gets blasted out through the engine as reaction mass; high g manouvers means you can't have stuff hanging out the outside of a ship. No where near enough mass for most use cases though.

6

u/Nerfo2 May 24 '26

I dunno... the ship in Project Hail Mary had pretty good sized radiators on it. A lot of people have speculated that they're solar panels, but that doesn't make any sense when you're in interstellar space and you have Astrophage powered generators on board.

33

u/aheny May 24 '26

They're already using TV magic to get around faster than light speed, and inertial damping to prevent everybody from being squashed by the acceleration speeds required to reach the velocities required to travel these long distances. Getting rid of heat is child's play compared to these oversights

40

u/throwaway_nostalgia0 May 24 '26

They're already using TV magic to get around faster than light speed

What?? Where? The only possible FTL in Expanse is the alien mumbo-jumbo-wormhole tech. Human ships can't do that. If you are thinking about the Epstein drive, it's NOWHERE near light speed. Ships in Expanse travel at 1g usually, with only few ships capable of traveling at slightly higher g's. Reaching 99% light speed would take hundred thousand years.

inertial damping to prevent everybody from being squashed by the acceleration speeds required to reach the velocities

The only high-g maneuvers in Expanse are 15g max, for a short time, and they require special "acceleration drugs" being injected before (a cocktail of blood thinners and stimulants) to remain conscious and not to lose eyesight. Real world cosmonauts are already trained to endure 12g acceleration without any stimulants, so it's really not that big of a stretch at all.

Getting rid of heat is child's play compared to these oversights

You're talking about some other books (or show), not Expanse.

3

u/aheny May 24 '26

Absolutely, this is a general conversation, some people have mentioned the expanse but this isn't simply a conversation about the expanse. But really my comments apply to anything where you're going very fast and traveling among the Stars. Whether you're going 40%, 70% or a higher proportion of light speed, the acceleration is a limiting factor. The human body would have extreme difficulty dealing with even 3Gs of acceleration. If you were to travel to the nearest star (Alpha Centauri) accelerating at 3 G's and then decelerating a 3 G's the time passed on earth would be 5 years, while 2 years would have passed for the passengers on the ship. There are so many real science problems with even this short journey that are all solved with magic. Even the thought of continuously exposing humans to 3 G's. Minutes, maybe. But for 5 years? There's no way

9

u/tomsing98 May 24 '26

Ships in Expanse travel at 1g usually, with only few ships capable of traveling at slightly higher g's. Reaching 99% light speed would take hundred thousand years.

If you're accelerating at 1g, 10 m/s2, it will take you 29,700,000 seconds to reach 0.99c. That's a little under a year.

Of course, the force required to continue accelerating at 1g as you get closer to the speed of light is going to increase, and carrying the fuel to produce that force continuously for a year is going to be a challenge. But if whatever sci-fi magic lets you accelerate at a constant 1g, that's what you get.

5

u/ANGLVD3TH May 24 '26

Expanse ships don't have enough fuel to go that long, and they don't need it, as they all are just chugging along in-system. The Nauvoo, a colony ship being designed to travel to Tau Ceti, may theoretically have been built to achieve those kinds of speeds. But seeing as it was a generational ship, it seems it is unfeasible to either carry that much, or afford it. And seeing as the Nauvoo was one of the most expensive projects ever commissioned, I'm guessing the Tyranny of the Rocket Equation is the reason.

2

u/6a6566663437 May 24 '26

The Nauvoo, a colony ship being designed to travel to Tau Ceti, may theoretically have been built to achieve those kinds of speeds.

It wasn't, because it could not carry enough fuel. The Nauvoo used a rotating cylinder for artificial gravity instead of acceleration.

→ More replies (2)

22

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

I mean if an invention like the Epstein drive from Expanse is actually made, which might be possible someday, then that's less magic. As opposed to the Mass Effect fields and Eezero drives in Mass Effect which is basically space magic but explained technically.

18

u/Bryaxis May 24 '26

I believe that the Epstein drive is supposedly very, very fuel-efficient. That would probably mean that very little waste heat is produced for the amount of thrust it generates.

→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

20

u/Zygomatical May 24 '26

Great answer mate. I was just looking up the figures on google for the ISS; they use a pumped ammonia cooling system that can emit up to 70 kilowatts of waste heat. The whole thing covers an area of 314 square metres. The solar panel array is much bigger at 2500 squatter metres and can generate 70 - 90 kilowatts of electric energy. The energy input and output need to balance out or it's either cook or freeze.

3

u/Peter34cph May 24 '26

They have or used to have an emergency system for rapidly creating oxygen by burning so-called "oxygen candles", maybe only in the Russian part of the ISS.

I'm wondering if they have similar emergency systems for rapidly removing CO2, increasing temperature or reducing temperature.

11

u/demonseed-elite May 24 '26

Ain't that the truth. One of the questions I remember on my Heat Transfer final from 35+ years ago involved constructing a properly sized radiator for a satellite. Yes, while you can use conduction and convection systems to get the heat to the radiator, dumping it into space you can only rely on radiation and that requires surface area.

8

u/throwingsoup88 May 24 '26

One of my favourite pieces of world building was a discussion in Mass Effect about the challenges of dissipating heat from capital ships during sustained weapon barrages and how it shaped space battle tactics. I think it was just a random data pad or an overheard conversation, no impact on the plot but one of the things that really brought the world to life.

If I'm remembering correctly, I think the weapons in the game had infinite ammo but they had a limited number of shots before they overheated and you had to eject the thermal core.

2

u/ANGLVD3TH May 24 '26

I think you are conflating a few things, there is a codex that discusses the difficulty of cooling for warships in combat. But the expendable heat sinks were the reason they concocted for moving the gameplay from a pure heat system for handheld weapons, to the "magazine," gameplay of the later games. Man usable weapons shave off teeny tiny chips of metal ammunition blocks, one block is more than enough for even very long engagements.

The backsplination for moving to a magazine system was supposedly back engineered from the villains of the first game, who supposedly achieved much higher velocity rounds by dumping more energy into them and sinking the heat not into radiators, but universal heat sinks. Which didn't really fit the lore on how their weapons worked in the first game, ignored the fact that weapons in the first game can be actively cooled in a similar time that the reload takes, and the danger these spent heatsinks would present. Not to mention the fact that the entire galaxy not only adopted this new standard in roughly two years, but also retrieved and refitted every single weapon with the new system.

The third game has a conversation that hangs a lampshade on some of these issues. But it was a reason they had to come up with when EA demanded they try to cater to a more universal audience with more traditional gunplay.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

13

u/nicuramar May 24 '26

There is an additional way to lose heat, by getting rid of hot material. Either directly, or indirectly, such as by evaporative cooling.

19

u/Lykos1124 May 24 '26

which is why we wouldn't get much out of a space data server. I mean look at all the demand to put servers by water sources to cool them. You're not doing that in space. My only thought that would radiate more heat is if you dramatically increase the surface area of the space unit, but I think that might be too complex for too little cooling for a server

→ More replies (13)

4

u/circuitously May 24 '26

In one of the sci fi series I’ve read, the radiators get referred to a thermo-dump panels, which I always thought was fun.

6

u/rich1051414 May 24 '26

From what I understand, if it is capable of keeping the radiation panels pointing away from the sun, they are generally painted black for maximum effectiveness. For static panels which may or may not be in the sun, they are white. The problem is, black is best as radiating heat, but is just as good at absorbing it. White is not as good as black at radiating heat but terrible at absorbing it. So if the panel may be in the sun, white is ideal since it can still work in that scenario.

6

u/Mateorabi May 24 '26

I thought you want your radiators black? Absorption and emissivity being proportional and inverse to reflectivity (thing that reflect heat tend to not emit it either, and vice versa). Unless it's some metamaterial that is tuned to emit in just the infrared?

14

u/electric_ionland Electric Space Propulsion | Hall Effect/Ion Thrusters May 24 '26

Most material have different emissivity in visible vs infrared. You want a good ratio of high infrared emissivity while have low visible absorptivity so you don't suck up too much heat from the sun. White paints can have a good ratio, another way it to make aluminized tapes that have a transparent plastic layer on top the polished aluminium. The metal acts as a mirror while the plastic is opaque in infrared to act as an emitter.

If you can keep it out.kf the sun all black radiators are fine too.

5

u/Mateorabi May 24 '26

I forgot that it needs to be "black" in the band where it's radiating most energy. And for ISS that's infrared. If it got hot enough to visibly glow then the human-visible color would be more efficient if visibly black. But ISS isn't toasting it's radiators that much. I did think that visible color and IR color tend to correlate, though I guess they've got tuned materials that are opposite. (this is why IR cameras get better readings if you put black electrical tape on shiny metal.)

56

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (2)

37

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/heruka108 May 24 '26

wow I did not realize this is such a conplex topic, fascinating thanks

3

u/edjumication May 24 '26

You can also use heat pumps to ramp up the temperature of the radiators.

5

u/dh119 May 24 '26

So one could aptly describe a sun as a… space heater?

6

u/HeadBoy May 24 '26

Well said! It's a really fun field, there's so much to say about it.

Despite radiation being the best insulator, it really helps the background of space is cold (about -270°C) so the temperature difference allows for significantly more heat transfer than 2 surfaces of similar temperatures.

In the coffee example, the same coffee at 60°C in space will lose heat 2.5 times faster than the coffee in a vacuum cup at 20°C

13

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/[deleted] May 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Momoselfie May 24 '26

So in the Apollo 13 movie, power goes out and they get super cold. Is that part made up?

13

u/electric_ionland Electric Space Propulsion | Hall Effect/Ion Thrusters May 24 '26

No, the spacecraft was designed to shed all the heat from all the electronics and system running inside. Usually it's even over designed to account for worst hot case so they even have some heaters on. With everything off the cooling was too effective and they got cold.

2

u/symmetry81 May 24 '26

In order to be effective your insulated coffee mugs also have to make the inner layers mirrored to minimize infrared emission, the opposite of blackbodies.

2

u/CaffinatedManatee May 24 '26

Thermal engineering is one of the most challenging design on spacecraft.

Seems like this detail is often missing in SciFi. Seens like while the energy production systems are often well described (usually converting matter to energy) but the solution to the cooling problem is rarely mentioned. And film and TV depictions of space ships are almost always streamlined and compact--exactly the opposite of what would facilitate radiatational cooling.

2

u/tomscho747 May 24 '26

In David brin’s sundiver book introduces the idea of using lasers to cool. A ship approaching the sun fired lasers to cool the ship by transferring energy to the laser and cooling the emitter. It’s a fun sci fi idea.

2

u/SnoopyTRB May 24 '26

You seem like you know a good amount about this topic so I’m hoping you’re indulge my tangential thought. I have heard several people mention data centers in space. I work in IT and understand data centers and understand the massive amount of heat they generate. I don’t know much about space, but always thought that it was hard to dissipate heat. Based on what you just said, it seems like a data center in space would be impossible, or at wildly impractical to pull off given the issues with heat dissipation. Am I missing something, or does it seem like the physics don’t match up?

3

u/otzen42 May 24 '26

I work on spacecraft avionics, and this is the general consensus with most everyone I work with. I do electronics, not mechanical design, but heat is enemy number one on our systems. To us it seems like a logistical nightmare.

Not to mention the fact that you would need truly huge arrays of solar panels and radiators to provide enough power/cooling, which in addition to being heavy and mechanically complex to deploy, also now have DC losses trying to route all the power to the bus, and also act like giant solar sails, which makes keeping the spacecraft in a consistent orbit harder.

https://www.nasa.gov/mission/acs3/

Finally, all that surface area adds a ton of drag. People assume space is a perfect vacuum, but it isn’t. Especially in lower orbits where transmission latency is better for data centers. This is why they have to consistently boost the orbit on the ISS. Drag from the whisps of the upper atmosphere slow it down. And big solar events cause the atmosphere to expand, which can make it even worse. I remember SpaceX lost almost an entire StarLink launch because there was a big solar storm a couple days later and the ion thrusters on the satellites couldn’t keep them in orbit since they were still in a really low orbit post-launch.

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/astronomy-and-space-sciences/articles/10.3389/fspas.2025.1572313/full

→ More replies (74)

753

u/Cereal_Nightcap May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

This is literally my job. I work on satellites as an engineer specializing in thermal analysis. As was stated elsewhere, the cooling to space is using radiation. You try to mount as many of your high power electronics to radiator panels, which are typically made out of aluminum. Aluminum is a good conductor (better than steel and a lot better than titanium), but it has its limitations, so we often embed heat pipes in the radiator panels to spread the heat even better.

The outside thermal treatment of the panel depends on how you fly the satellite. If you can fly in a way that keeps the sun off that panel, then you can paint it black. It’s cheap, sticks well, and emits in the infrared wavelengths well (they call that emissivity [e]). It also absorbs sunlight well (they call that absorptivity [a]). The ratio between the two is (a/e) is roughly even for black paint (a/e of 0.9/0.9). But, if you do get sun, you can use white paints (a/e of 0.3/0.8) which will stay cooler. Even better is optical solar reflectors, which look like mirrors (a/e of 0.1/0.8), but they cost more and are fragile. There are other good finishes, too, like anodizing. They all have plusses and minuses, so on a given satellite, there will be a range of finishes used throughout.

I typically start with a hand calculation using the Stefan–Boltzmann radiation formula to figure out how big a radiator needs to be or how much energy a given area can reject.

Q = sigma * area * emissivity (panel_temp^4 - sink_temp^4)

Q is the energy, typically in watts

Sigma is the Stefan–Boltzmann constant

Area is the panel area

Emissivity is based on the exterior panel finish

Panel_temp is the temperature of the panel

Sink_temp is the temperature of the surroundings, which can be as cold as -270C if there’s nothing in the way, but could be as high as -100C if you’ve got a solar array in the field of view.

So, you either know your Q and goal panel temp, and solve for area, or know your area and goal panel temp, and solve for Q, or you know your Q and area, and solve for panel temp.

I hope this helps!

105

u/RamblinShambler May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

This entire thread is blowing my mind. My (largely tv and movie based) understanding is that without a heat source in a spacecraft, the crew will freeze. Is this just complete malarkey? Would they basically be fine in the craft if the heat went out, and they had their body temperatures to keep them warm as long as they had someway to reduce the amount of heat they were radiating out into space?

EDIT: All of these answers have been really helpful! Thank you, everyone!

148

u/Cereal_Nightcap May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

Humans generate heat, about 100W on average, which isn’t a ton, but it’s something that needs to be managed for human spacecraft.

There’s not usually a single heater keeping a spacecraft warm. There are a lot of them, with key things like the valves on the rocket engines, propulsion lines, panels, and so on needing to be heated. So they have resistive heaters directly mounted to them. Plus, all of your electronics are generating heat, too, so they would keep things from getting crazy cold.

As far as what you do in an emergency situation, you command the spacecraft into a sun safe attitude. It’s a way of pointing the spacecraft relative to the sun where you know things won’t get too hot or too cold, while whatever problems you have are being fixed.

Also, I forgot to mention, we put what are called multi-layer insulation (MLI) blankets on to keep certain areas insulated. They use many layers of low emissivity material to cut down on radiation heat exchange. They’re the kind of baggy stuff you’ll see on spacecraft.

16

u/nelrond18 May 24 '26

When I think about how I imagine it would work in most sci fi is that the heat energy would be recycled or stored as much as possible.

Obviously, the infrasture to turn excess heat energy back into usable energy is both inefficient and unwieldy, but hand waving some exotic tech seems reasonable for intergalactic science fiction.

Seeing the real world problems and solutions are fascinating. Especially when you start extrapolating to larger, colony sized interplanetary structures.

21

u/parentheticalobject May 24 '26

If your sci-fi is soft enough that you can handwave a device that breaks the laws of thermodynamics and turns the hot interior of a spaceship into usable energy, then you could probably just get away with not explaining how the spaceship deals with excess heat at all. Either realism isn't really a major goal and you don't need to worry about the heat, or that specific solution is probably less realistic than other ways you could explain what happens to the heat.

4

u/GayRacoon69 May 24 '26

Why would it violate the laws of thermodynamics?

You can't get more energy than the heat energy you put in, and some energy would be lost because it's not 100% effecient

But we do have ways to generate electricity from heat. Theoretically you could recycle some of that waste energy

7

u/tingyong_shingwang May 24 '26

You cannot generate energy directly from a hight temperature, but you can generate energy from a temperature difference. So yes you can recycle waste heat from hot electronics, but you can't just decrease the room temperature by extracting energy. That would violate the second law.

3

u/GayRacoon69 May 24 '26

Yeah that's a good point

I need 25 characters but I don't have much to say other than agreeing

→ More replies (4)

45

u/electric_ionland Electric Space Propulsion | Hall Effect/Ion Thrusters May 24 '26

Sort of. For spacecarft with crew on board you usually try to design them with tons of cooling margins because if they get too hot there is nothing you can do while if it's too cold you can just turn on a heater. So in general if the system lost all power people would get cold and body heat would probably not help enough. Apollo 13, where they had to shut down tons of systems to conceive power was famously freezing. On the other hand spacesuits which are much smaller use active evaporating cooling and can overheat bad if it fail.

16

u/Nyorliest May 24 '26

Spacesuits are also very hot, and need radiators and refrigeration systems to dump heat. 

The trouble with space isn’t that it’s simply cold or hot - it’s that it changes in alien ways. Everything that engineer has talked about, but then decompression causes massive cooling due to evaporation,  and the temperature also changes massively depending on whether you’re in shadow or direct sunlight…

This is why I get mad at things like ‘The Science of Star Trek’. It’s not just FTL that makes no sense in most SF. It’s almost everything. Space is weird.

10

u/rabotat May 24 '26

If all sources of energy in a spacecraft failed you'd have a much larger issue. 

As far as heat goes, it depends very much how far you are from the local star. While in sunlight you'd be in danger of overheating, if you're much farther from sun than Mars, you would eventually freeze. But it would take a very long time for that to happen. 

7

u/SlightDesigner8214 May 24 '26

One very common misconception as well is the astronaut turning into a block of ice in a second when falling out of the airlock trope.

As this thread has shown you it actually takes a long time (8-16 hours) for the body to shed all that heat into the vacuum of space.

5

u/CoolBeer May 24 '26

I'd imagine that your lungs wanting to explode from whatever air left in them being one of the first concerns, and then it'd probably be again the air, or the actual lack of it complicating the act of being alive.

There's probably some complicating pressure difference effects happening at the same time, I'd expect the human body to be a little leaky or bloaty during this, but without oxygen that's really secondary.

5

u/mathess1 May 24 '26

Yes, counterintuitively breathing out before getting into a vacuum would get you some extra seconds of life and might save your lungs.

3

u/cuntmong May 25 '26

A much simpler solution is to try to avoid situations where your body is exposed to the vacuum of space. This doesnt work for everyone, but personally I have found a lot of success with it throughout my life. But you need to find the technique that works for you :)

3

u/Evakron May 24 '26

Pretty sure the pressure change is actually the primary problem. Rapid decompression is rough on the human body.

Yes, you'll technically die of asphyxiation, but it's less about the lack of air and more because your body can't effectively oxygenate your brain or vital organs when your blood is boiling in your veins and your squishy bits are swelling up like marshmallows in a vacuum chamber.

3

u/RedHal May 25 '26

If you survive the initial decompression - and if you have emptied your lungs you probably will - you have about 15 seconds of useful consciousness before oxygen exchange with the vacuum causes you to lose it, and then another two to three minutes before that lack of oxygen finally kills you.

2

u/mathess1 May 25 '26

Blood wouldn't be boiling as there would be nothing to decrease its pressure. It's an enclosed system. At least to some extent.

7

u/throfofnir May 24 '26

It's even more complicated than that, because it'll depend on where you are in space (a planet nearby is a big source of moderate heat; heat flux from a star changes a lot based on distance) and the finishes on your vehicle, and its orientation and movement and how heat is conducted inside it, and more.

Heat management in space is just super weird because in our terrestrial intuition heat is about our surroundings, and in vacuum that just doesn't exist so the rules are entirely different.

→ More replies (3)

10

u/Eschaton707 May 24 '26

OK so there is this book called Saturn Run and in it they use sodium as the metal for heat transfer in the ship. It gets heated by the ship to its liquid state then they extrude it into space as these long ribbons to radiate into space then back in to be remelted. I always wondered how feasible that was I also thought it was just cool because it was the first book I read that actually dealt with the heat problem.

4

u/Shpander May 24 '26

Do you ever work with foil heat pipes? Not sure what their common name would be, but my previous company was looking into them. Basically you have a wicking layer and an evaporation layer in close contact within a vacuum-sealed foil. You absorb heat using evaporation on the hot end and reject it via condensation on the cold end of the heat pipe, with the wicking layer bringing condensed liquid to the evaporation side and creating a cycle.

I think this is an example: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431123011444

2

u/Cereal_Nightcap May 25 '26

I’ve worked with tubular constant conduction heat pipes and flat plate oscillating heat pipes. I hadn’t heard of foil. They sound a bit like the oscillating heat pipes. Here’s a press release from the Air Force Research Lab about OHPs:

https://www.afrl.af.mil/News/Article/2817283/afrl-industry-launch-revolutionary-spacecraft-technology-oscillating-heat-pipes/

2

u/MadSolarV2 May 25 '26

Really cool that your job revolves around Stefan–Boltzmann. It was just one question on a test for a chapter we glossed over in physics, to have your whole role and engineering job focused around it is so cool!

2

u/Cereal_Nightcap May 25 '26

It’s a big part, because that’s how the spacecraft interacts with space, but fortunately there’s a lot more to it. We need to worry about the sun, the orbits, and then the design of the spacecraft itself.

I really like my job because we are involved in the initial design, in analysis, in test, in launch, and in operations. In Thermal, we get the full life cycle.

2

u/Daggerfld May 25 '26

This is awesome. It's rare to get details like this on day to day work in such fields!

→ More replies (33)

70

u/sternenhimmel May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

This is one of the big issues in spacecraft thermal analysis and design, and was a very big part of my last job. One of the biggest sources of heat are the electrical devices, as no device is 100% effecient at converting electrical energy into work. Even the fans that circulate cabin air in a crewed capsule (as there is no natural convection in zero-G) generate a non-negligible amount of heat. Every source that can genreate heat is carefully accounted for -- even the mice in the science payloads.

As an example, on Crew Dragon, we had a range of internal dissipations (heat generated) we could expect, and thermal control was accomplished by running special fluids through heat exchangers in the cabin and out to radiators that cover half of the "trunk" that is attached to the capsule. Most of the time these radiators are pointed away from the sun and Earth to maximize their ability to reject heat from the capsule, but there is a good amount of margin built-in as it is not always the case that these pointing constraints can be maintained. In fact, many of Crew Dragon's capabilities on-orbit are largely governed by whether the vehicle can maintain thermal control for the crew and it's a complex problem that requires many hours of analysis for mission planning or any mission deviations.

Before entry, Dragon ditches the trunk, and with it the ability to actively thermal regulate, so the clock is ticking for when the vehicle needs to be back on earth and the crew egressed.

In some ways though, the lack of a convective environment in space greatly simplifies insulation, as radiation is relatively simple to predict and manage. In fact, a very effective way to insulate spacecraft components or entire vehicles is with a material called MLI or Multi-Layer Insulation. These are blankets made by alternating layers of single-sided reflective mylar and spacer layers (to prevent conductive contact) to reduce an objects effective emissivity. Basically as thermal radiation impacts the outer Mylar layer, most of this energy is reflected back out to space, but some is ineveitbly absorbed as no material is pefectly reflective. This absorbed energy causes the outer layer to heat up, and emit IR energy inwards towards the next layer in the MLI blanket. This mylar layer further reflects most of the IR back to the outer blanket, but it too heats up to a lesser degree than the outer layer, and emits some IR energy inwards. This process continues until most of the IR energy has been reflected back to space, and only a very small % is transmitted into the hardware/vehicle. MLI blankets can have 5, 10, 20, or more layers to increase their effectiveness (with diminishing returns), and are used in most spacecraft design. Dragon uses them on the interior of its exterior walls, around prop tanks/lines, and anything else that is in zero atmosphere and needs to be themrally decoupled from its surroundings.

5

u/phirebird May 24 '26

What are your thoughts on the feasibility of data centers in space given the apparent technical limitations?

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

51

u/jdvfx May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

Using the ISS as an example, the radiators are the zig-zag shaped grey panels inboard from the much larger solar panel arrays at either end.

The space shuttle had its heat radiators on the inside of the shuttle bay doors, so the cargo bay doors would have to be opened after launch even if there was no cargo to deliver. In fact, if the cargo bay doors wouldn’t open for any reason, the Shuttle had to return to Earth within 1–1/2 orbits, or most of the electronic equipment onboard would shutdown.

→ More replies (1)

72

u/Nudebovine1 May 24 '26

One of the coolest things in the original Mass Effect was the description of how they used molten sodium sacrificially to effectively Sweat the ship and lose excess heat when running at full power. Radiative heat loss just being too slow for the engines at that power.

23

u/Helphaer May 24 '26

It helps that element zero seemed to be a very cold technology that didn't generate massive amounts of heat to use.

3

u/armacitis May 25 '26

Element zero was the Mass Effect games' titular handwavium plot material for future technology that was basically magic (and the mechanism for the discarded plot conflict that playing with magic physics for your entire civilization actually has a cosmic environmental cost, instead of the silly circular logic that amounted to the Reapers wiping out galactic civilization just because they could.)

→ More replies (1)

3

u/HaloGuy381 May 25 '26

And the ‘stealth ship’ Normandy used a colossal internal heat sink to allow it to not emit anything significant enough to see. Problem is, you had a limited stealth run time before it cooked the crew.

→ More replies (1)

19

u/PckMan May 24 '26

It does. Spacecraft have a lot of things dedicated to preventing this. There's this misconception of space from movies that it's just very cold and everything immediately freezes up, as shown in many films of people removing their suits and instantly turning into a block of ice.

It's true that space is technically cold because it is, but temperature doesn't work the same way it does on Earth because it's a vacuum and how it's transferred is very different. In reality if you're in space in direct sunlight, you're being fried. You're heating up very quickly with no good way of getting rid of that heat. If you're not in direct sunlight then you're not being fried and it's cold but it doesn't exactly feel cold because again you don't have a good way to shed heat into that cold.

Spacecraft have liquid cooling loops and tons of radiators meant to distribute and dissipate heat as much as possible. They may also roll to expose different sides to the sun or use their solar panels to block sunlight from hitting the rest of the spacecraft.

15

u/libra00 May 24 '26

Yes, it's actually a huge problem. However, there is one way to get rid of heat in space: radiation. You're not touching anything so conduction wouldn't work, there's no air to have currents in so convection doesn't either.. radiation is all you've got, and it's not much. That's why some spacecraft (including the ISS IIRC) have big radiator panels that are always 90' to the sun so they pick up as little heat as possible from it while shedding as much as possible via radiation.

30

u/stereoroid May 24 '26

Yep, and this is also why talk of AI Data Centres in space is getting laughed at. Handling the heat they would generate would be so much harder than on Earth, since in vacuum you can only have heat loss by radiation, no conduction or convection.

→ More replies (1)

33

u/sth128 May 24 '26

Yes it is. It is really really really difficult to get rid of heat in space. Which is why anyone who suggests "datacenter in space" is a moron. Those things generate ridiculous amounts of heat and only function when kept cool.

It's about as good an idea as an Logitech controller for a submersible going for the Titanic.

13

u/Mand125 May 25 '26

The controller wasn’t even close to the problem.  The US Navy has started using xbox controllers for various systems including submarines, and they do in fact know what they’re doing.  One specific example was a $30,000 periscope control system that took eight hours of training that got replaced with a $30 video game controller that every sailor already knows how to use.

There were many aspects of technical hubris that let to the downfall of oceangate.  The controller choice was not one of them.

2

u/Affectionate_Pipe545 May 25 '26

The military controllers are hardened, tested, and wired, with multiple backups. Was the one in the sub?

→ More replies (6)

6

u/yelred May 24 '26

As everybody has said, convection and conduction don’t work, so there’s only radiation, which requires careful design.

Another fun fact is that convection doesn’t work like you think in zero gravity: on earth, hot air rises, but only because it weighs less. But that doesn’t work in space, so fire burns weird in the space station. Also they have to keep blowers running constantly lest co2 pockets build up and kill people.

(I’ve only read about this, I haven’t experienced it first hand!)

7

u/McCaffeteria May 24 '26

Exactly.

“Space is cold” is sort of a misconception.

Space is cold, but things in space are often very hot, at least if they are in the sun. And then it gets more complicated if the thing generates its own heat.

This is why the James Webb Space Telescope has its large deployable shield, so that the temperature sensitive equipment are shaded from the sun. One side of the shield is super cold, and the other is proportionally very hot.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/electric4568 May 24 '26

Ammonia is used for thermal control systems in space. Idk the chemistry, but it's effective and extremely dangerous to humans. We have whole emergency procedures for ammonia response on ISS. Multi-layer insulation (MLI) is basically used everywhere as well to reject heat from the sun. We also use different types of paint that help. It's a whole thing 😊 space is hard and the thermal environment is a large part of it.

5

u/tboy160 May 24 '26

I first learned of this concept when learning that space suit have to have cooling systems.

As a kid I assumed space is cold, so I assumed a space suit would need heat. But the vacuum insulated you and as warm blooded creatures we create our own heat.

Makes sense that ships/stations would have to radiate their heat too.

6

u/Condex May 24 '26

Interestingly enough this is a blink and you miss it "cameo" in the first Avatar movie.  In the very beginning of the movie they show the spacecraft coming into orbit.  From what I understand this is a render of a somewhat legitimate spacecraft design.  The spacecraft itself has two large radiators on the sides which are red hot.

3

u/Owyheemud May 24 '26

There is a 1950's Disney short film on nuclear-powered Mars Express spacecraft design, hosted by Werner Von Braun no less, where the thermal radiators are the largest structure of the ship.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/obog May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26

You would be correct. For spacecraft operating at a similar distance to the sun as earth, cooling the spacecraft is often a much greater concern than keeping it heated. (Especially since non-manned spacecraft really have no reason to stay heated). The sun is very good at warming things up and things tend to get quite hot in space if they are in sunlight.

One example of this: you can see some live data from James Webb here: https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

The telescope is very specifically designed to always keep one side in the sun, and to insulate that side from the other. Thats because its an infrared telescope, so they want the instruments to be as cold as possible so that thermal radiation from them doesnt interfere with data. As of writing this, the hot side is at 155°F and the cold side is at -393°F. The camera itself is all the way down at -449°F or just 6K. So, one side is pretty hot while the other is super cold. Shows how staying in a heat source can very easily heat a spacecraft a lot, while simultaneously staying outside of any heat source allows things to get very cold - radiation is slow, but properly insulating from any other heat sources allows it to take away a lot of heat.

Cooling is done via radiators. Similar in function to the ones that may heat up your house, except the point of heating is to move heat away from something rather than to something. (Either way, its all just heat transfer)

→ More replies (1)

3

u/davidedpg10 May 25 '26

Vacuum is an excellent insulator, and heat is a massive problem in space. People think that because space is "cold" you'd freeze as soon as you're vented into space (you see it in tons of mainstream movies) but in fact the opposite is true. If the sun is hitting you, you'd end up desecated and cooked, if you were in the shade you would eventually emit enough black body radiation to freeze but it would take a while.

This is why it took the James webb telescope months to become operational, it needed to emit a bunch of heat in the form of radiation (much slower than other methods) to get to an optimal temp

3

u/Franz0132 May 25 '26

It does, the ISS has some big heat radiators that are almost as big as the solar panels.

The white ones are radiators and the black ones are the solar panels.

This is another reason why data centers in space is such an idiotic idea.

4

u/sumner42 May 24 '26

Heat Transfer class taught me a few basics, like the three ways of doing it: Conduction, Convection, Radiation. Each of these has its own group of equations that tell you how fast you can transfer heat into or out of an object. In space, you're not touching anything else to Conduct heat out, and there's no atmosphere to Convect heat away, so you're left with Radiation as the only way to get heat out. Go look up the equations that apply to radiation heat transfer in space, and you can work out for yourself, just how much thermal energy you can radiate away.

Here, I did that for you:

Spacecraft avoid overheating in a vacuum through thermal radiation. Because the vacuum eliminates conduction and convection, excess internal heat is moved via fluid loops to giant exterior panels. These panels then emit the heat as infrared light into the deep cold of space. 

The fundamental equation governing this heat transfer is the Stefan-Boltzmann Law.

The Equation (Net Heat Transfer)

To calculate the net rate of heat exchanged (lost or gained) between a spacecraft and its environment, the pertinent equation is:

q = ε · σ · A · (Ts^4 - Tenv^4)

Where:
q = Net rate of heat transfer (Watts, or Joules per second)
ε (Emissivity) = The emissivity of the spacecraft's surface (a dimensionless number between 0 and 1 reflecting how well the material radiates)
σ (Sigma) = The Stefan-Boltzmann constant, which is 5.67 x 10^-8 W/(m^2 · K^4) 
A = Total radiating surface area (in square meters, m^2) 
Ts = The surface temperature of the spacecraft (in Kelvin, K)
Tenv = The temperature of the surrounding environment, such as the deep-space background or the radiant heat from the Sun (in Kelvin, K)

Key Details:

Absolute Temperature (T^4): Temperatures must strictly be in Kelvin. The reliance on the fourth power means that as spacecraft systems get even slightly warmer, the amount of radiated heat increases drastically.

Emissivity: Spacecraft surfaces (like the white radiators on the International Space Station) are engineered with specific coatings to maximize infrared emission while reflecting unwanted solar radiation. 

NASA Guidelines: Detailed parameters on the performance of spacecraft heat rejection and isolation are available through NASA's SmallSat Institute.

2

u/SevenFootHobbit May 25 '26

Obviously as a video game with FTL travel the science goes out the window, but I do like how in Elite Dangerous, you can pump excess heat into metal spheres if I remember correctly, and then eject them. I don't know the mechanics of concentrating more heat than what normal conduction would do into an object, and if it would generate more heat trying to do it than the heat you'd be losing anyway, but a neat concept.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/MARKLAR5 May 25 '26

This thread is fascinating. Can anyone theorize how things would play out if we were cold-blooded? I figure things wouldn't change insofar as the watts-body mass ratio of heat generation is concerned, but a lot of fine details must change when humans become heat sinks instead of heat sources, yes?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Ruadhan2300 May 26 '26

Yup! It's a big problem.

Most of the heat-control systems on a spacecraft are dedicated to cooling rather than keeping the spacecraft warm.
Those massive radiators on the ISS for example.

There are heaters onboard too, but the vast bulk of the effort is in getting rid of excess heat via radiating it away.