Astronauts' Dirty Laundry (2003)
nasa.gov
nasa.gov
I guess it's one of those things that may already have been considered but then it was decided that it wasn't worth the extra weight and that reusing/dumping clothes was good enough.
It's likely that weight is probably not the biggest concern if such a washing system were to be implemented, as they would probably design a system to recycle the washing liquid. I think most solvents that are candidates as washing liquids post either additional health and/or fire hazards in space. In addition, and particularly for water-based washing, I think the error tolerance in engineering either (1) additional infrastructure to the existing water-recycling system and/or (2) a part that can confidently remove unwanted chemicals are challenging problems. the latter is probably the bigger concern because tolerance for error there would probably be substantially lower than urine recycling.
Just a guess because I thought it's an interesting comment, and it's quite possible that one can already design (if it doesn't already exist) a washing liquid that is safe for consumption at small quantities.
Also nobody's mentioned UV light. Odors are often due to bacteria and simply killing that stuff would go a long way to reusing garments without gagging on the odor.
Having 1 less g would probably mess with the drainage, but not the rest.
But then I wonder how much such a machine would spin/unbalance the space station.
That doesn't mean that vibrations are all safe. They can break stuff on-board, or mess up experiments. If you do it exactly right (wrong?) it can even change the attitude of the station. (after all the reaction wheels and Control moment gyroscopes look kind of like washing machine's drum if you squint enough.)
It's just too easy to not bother. For a moon colony or a Mars base, the economics change, but for near earth orbit it just doesn't make sense.
Maybe true now, but this wasn't the case when this 2003 NASA article was written. It quotes >$5k/lbs for the Shuttle. Six months of clothes for a single person wearing each article for a week is still going to run, what, at least 40lbs, or >$200k. With six people on the ISS, that's at least few million bucks per year, and likely more. The ISS must have been planned to last minimum 10 years (without anything cheap like Dragon on the horizon), so I think it's still a valid question why they didn't design a small washing machine.
Not actually advocating for that—beyond cultural difficulties, I’m pretty sure clothes are useful enough to maintain—but it’s an interesting thought exercise to zoom out from “how to wash clothes better” to “how to do the job clothes do better with minimal cost.”
The second thing is individual thermal comfort. Say, 20°C is usually "fine for everyone", but some people would feel that it's quite warm to wear a T-shirt, while other people would find it barely warm enough to not wear a coat.
I’m not sure about the comment on the cotton fibres. Garments in storage don’t just shed fibres, they need to be agitated. A non-woven storage bag would solve that.