My Assistant
Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)
  |
 [News] To space, and beyond!, Assorted cool space news |
 May 7 2006, 08:11 PM
Post
#51
|
|||||||||
|
Running Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860  |
In fact, I was recently informed that it's both issues. Jupiter flips Mars around over the course of millions of years and Mars doesn't have a big moon to stabilize it.
No, I'm just an amateur who reads a lot of science books. Per my .sig, my education is actually in materials engineering; I'm currently employed with a contractor to prevent the US Army from rusting away. If you have specific questions, I can either google up some authoritative links or ask one of the guys in my group, who got a masters in Space Systems Engineering.
Actually, you can make off-equator elevators. It's just harder and requires yet stronger materials. This has an example of an off-equator lunar elevator: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/images...ar_elevator.jpg
Yes. Many asteroid mining proposals tend to be hopeless optimistic. A book that inspired a generation of aerospace engineers, "The High Frontier" by Gerard K. O'Neill, is similarly hopelessly optimistic about turning profits from solar power satellites, using vast numbers of shuttle launches, building huge space stations inexpensively, etc. |
||||||||
 |
 
|
||||||||
|
May 7 2006, 08:17 PM
Post
#52
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 7-February 03 Member No.: 4,025 |
And to think, I dropped out of engineering school. Probably the smartest thing I ever did....
|
|
|
|
|
May 7 2006, 10:07 PM
Post
#53
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 305 Joined: 2-March 03 Member No.: 4,188 |
www.permanent.com also makes good claims about asteroid mining.
I truthfully think they're an excellent source of resources, but I think the Space Elevator is necessary first. |
|
|
|
|
May 8 2006, 03:35 PM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Old Man Jones Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,415 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New York Member No.: 1,699 |
The article seems to be ignoring two problems with the nanotubes as well.
a) They state that the nanotubes would be "bonded" together to create the super-cable for a space elevator. Even if the nanotubes are strong enough, is the bonding? b) A cable gets effectively weaker and less capable of bearing a load the longer it is. Even at "100 times stronger than steel" nanotubes won't have near the tensile strength to serve as the cable material. -karma |
|
|
|
|
May 8 2006, 03:51 PM
Post
#55
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 681 Joined: 28-February 06 From: UK Member No.: 8,319 |
If you could link looped nanotubes together like a chain (quite a trick admittedly), and then braid those chain filaments together, would that create a strong fiber? I'm not really sure.
Never did buy the whole space elevator concept, personally. Think anti-gravity is more plausible! |
|
|
|
|
May 9 2006, 05:51 PM
Post
#56
|
|||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
If the bonds are at the ends of nanotubes carrying the main tensile load, then you can figure the actual material strength is about 1/4 to 1/2 its theoretical strength. Strength of parallel bonds to prevent fibers from separating don't require significant strength.
It could work if you accept high taper factors.
Not exactly. Carbon nanotubes' primary strength is along their length, not sideways. Bending the tubes into chain links puts loads horizontally on the fibers, which will part easily. Graphite, the soft stuff of pencil "leads," is nearly as strong as carbon nanotubes along the correct molecular plane. Graphite fibers go to pains to orient the correct planes along the length of the fiber, but they can still be cut with steel scissors. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
May 9 2006, 06:14 PM
Post
#57
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 72 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Oak Ridge, TN, CAS Member No.: 407 |
Right, you write with the point of the pencil, and it dulls, but it holds.
You write with the pencil leaning too far to the side, and *snap*. I know that's grossly simplified, but the analogy works. |
|
|
|
|
May 11 2006, 11:41 AM
Post
#58
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
Heh. That'll work. Actually, I was thinking that writing with a pencil is an example of the soft side of graphite (it just smears on something as soft as paper), while ultra-strong carbon fiber composites were an example of how graphite can handle a lot of tension. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 11 2006, 11:59 AM
Post
#59
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 681 Joined: 28-February 06 From: UK Member No.: 8,319 |
Yeah fair point. But if memory serves, isn't it theoretically possible to generate fullerene-style structures that aren't simply tubes or balls? So could you perhaps synthesize a toroidal carbon structure that's meant to be that shape, rather than just bend a tube into one? And then, perhaps, find a way to synthesize, in situ- at the end of the chain- a new carbon toroid? And ok, even if it not a toroid then some other kind of fullerene-inspired carbon unit that could be linked together strongly? Just a thought. Probably not the place for it, but hey. As a geneticist I'm better on the field of organic macromolecules, but I see organic molecular networks finding all sorts of wacky ways to synthesize wacky structures with wonderful properties, so that's why I'm open to the possibility. Still don't buy the space elevator idea though! Even with the strongest thinnest cable imaginable, just think of the wind strain over such a long length. Even if it didn't break the cable, it'd be constantly pulling the top end back down to Earth. And if something did break the whole system would come crashing down with horrific and expensive consequences. Nope, can't see it ever being built! But the carbon technology would still be pretty useful for other things. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 11 2006, 04:46 PM
Post
#60
|
|||||||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
Yes.
The end result would be the same. The load would still be applied perpendicular to the main load-bearing direction of the fullerene. You'd be better off trying to figure out how to generate continuous nanotubes for 25000 miles length, which, IMO, isn't quite as impossible as it sounds.
The wind loads aren't significant compared to the cable's own tension-related loads. Imagine a suspension bridge cable in the wind. The load the cable carries keeps it in place against winds.
That's why the elevator puts its center of mass above geosynchronous orbit, so the cable is always being pulled away from Earth because it wants to move to a higher orbit. Wind loads might slightly (very slightly) cause the bottom 0.08% (~20 miles of 25000) of the cable's length to curve a bit, but that would be fought by the enormous tension that the cable is under. Try plucking one of a grand piano's string at its base - does it stay curved?
That depends where the break is. The portion of the elevator above the break would just drift upward and westward, as its orbit would be somewhat longer than Earth's day. (In theory, if you kept the elevator's center of mass perfectly at geosynchronous orbit and ignored outside forces like the moon and sun, you wouldn't even need to anchor the elevator. It would just float almost stationary above the ground.) The portion of the elevator below the break would fall, but the effects would be comparable to have a suspension bridge cable fall. Most of it would hit the ground at speeds substantially below orbital velocity, even with a very high break. It'd certainly be messy at ground zero, but the damage would be a very narrow narrow strip. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
May 11 2006, 04:56 PM
Post
#61
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 681 Joined: 28-February 06 From: UK Member No.: 8,319 |
I still feel you could arrange the structure appropriately somehow, but yeah ok.
Ah, good point. Thanks for the explanation. There's another thing I was wondering about. I haven't thought this through but my gut feeling is that- particularly with very long carbon nanotubes, which I believe are highly conductive- wouldn't you get all kinds of energy flow running down that tube due to differential charges? Could that be a problem? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 11 2006, 07:52 PM
Post
#62
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,556 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 98 |
I've heard a concept for an elevator type I believe is known as a "Skyhook," where the elevator doesn't descend all the way to Earth, remaining instead in orbit (possibly mobile), while things from Earth headed upwards are lifted to the "lowest floor" of the elevator by plane, theoretically saving on a lot of stress and strain. Not sure how valid this is, though.
|
|
|
|
|
May 11 2006, 11:38 PM
Post
#63
|
|||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
By the time you're able to modify nanotube ends to some specific shape while forming a cable on the scale of an elevator, you can just link nanotubes end to end, essentially welding them together.
It's an engineering consideration. Lightning strikes can be a concern near the base. Otherwise, the only energy going through the cable should be what the operator puts into it. The elevator will be stationary in the Earth's magnetic field, so it won't generate electricity that way.
Depending on how big you make it, the skyhook can be much more feasible than an elevator because the stresses are lower. For example, if it's just a couple thousand miles long, it can reduce the velocity a rocket needs to reach to get to orbit to mach 15 or so. Since rocket fuel use is exponential, that can have dramatic benefits on fuel savings and huge cargo increases. You're also not so firmly tied to an equatorial orbit. http://members.aol.com/Nathan2go/SPELEV.HTM http://members.aol.com/Nathan2go/lunavat.htm The so-called lunar rotovator is very near-term feasible, very feasible. The cables might be individually less than 100 tons (easy to deliver even from Earth), though the system really benefits from some source of material other than from the Earth or moon (like an asteroid). |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
May 12 2006, 08:37 AM
Post
#64
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 681 Joined: 28-February 06 From: UK Member No.: 8,319 |
So solar wind and the Van Allen belts won't induce a potential difference between the two ends? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 12 2006, 08:44 AM
Post
#65
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 58 Joined: 9-May 06 From: Right behind you! Member No.: 8,538 |
If you're sufficiently far from the poles, that should only be a problem during really strong sunspot activity.
|
|
|
|
|
May 12 2006, 11:34 AM
Post
#66
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
Oh, right, the Van Allen belts have different charges. That might induce a current. Again, it's something that can't be overlooked, but nanotubes (graphite, basically) aren't very conductive and the charge sources (the belts) are vacuum-diffuse. It should be a manageable problem. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 12 2006, 01:44 PM
Post
#67
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 681 Joined: 28-February 06 From: UK Member No.: 8,319 |
Looks like they can be conductive, dependent on radius. But yeah I guess it's manageable if it doesn't generate enough heat to compromise the filament.
EDIT: Graphite's actually pretty conductive too, isn't it? |
|
|
|
|
May 12 2006, 02:05 PM
Post
#68
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
Graphite can be fairly conductive for a non-metal, though it's not going to be challenging copper or silver anytime soon. Bulk nanotubes will probably be similar to graphite in electrical conductivity, even if some nanotubes can be tricked to show dramatic conductivity. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 12 2006, 05:42 PM
Post
#69
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 305 Joined: 2-March 03 Member No.: 4,188 |
Lift-port is looking for people will to donate their farm space to provide space for a tether platform. I thought it was a neat idea. What's especially neat is that they're tying it to wind power.
Might as well let any friends in those locations know. The sooner they get a volunteer (network, people, network!) the sooner research gets started. And remember, research has compounding returns. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 13 2006, 01:47 AM
Post
#70
|
|
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
So, I was just watching TV when lo and behold I hear that the spaceport in New Mexico is, technically, fully functional. The first commercial launch will be next year, and they have about a half dozen clients and programs lined up ranging from Virgin Galactic (Now that was a press conference) and the X-Prize Cup.
|
|
|
|
|
May 13 2006, 02:09 PM
Post
#71
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,618 Joined: 29-January 03 From: Montevideo, Uruguay. Member No.: 3,992 |
Did you see the model for the spaceport?
If you look at it from above, it's Richard Branson's iris. That's right: Branson eyeballing space. The man has "supervillain" written all over him. :D |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2006, 04:33 PM
Post
#72
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,028 Joined: 9-November 02 From: The Republic of Vermont Member No.: 3,581 |
If supervillainy is what it takes to conquer space, bring on the death rays and insane laughter!
|
|
|
|
|
May 15 2006, 06:44 PM
Post
#73
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 305 Joined: 2-March 03 Member No.: 4,188 |
I often wonder what the 'common man' can do to speed our conquest of space, as a species.
I'd like to be able to put more consumer power towards goods that boost us into space, but it's tough. I mean, other than buying the books, what else is there to buy? Buying the books at least gets the money to the people working on these things (in an indirect way), but also provides moral support. |
|
|
|
|
May 15 2006, 08:50 PM
Post
#74
|
|
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
Convince Congress to pressure NASA to speed up the process of replacing the space shuttle, so that they can commercialize the landing runways in Florida and California. All other spaceport plans aside in Dubai or Singapore or wherever? They're still plans. The United States already has in place the infrastrucure (physical and legal), facilities and operations for at least three or four commercial spaceports right now. Unfortunately, all but one are owned and operated by NASA. If you really want to see more space travel, the most immediate thing one could do is have those facilities opened up to be used to launch and land private spacecraft.
Aside from that, it is currently a matter of building spacecraft to utilize those spaceports. Clearly it is possible. It just requires the willingness and financial resources to build enough of them to meet the demand. I just wish Branson's and Richardson's egos had at it during the press conference announcing their involvement. I'd have paid money to see that. |
|
|
|
|
May 16 2006, 06:14 PM
Post
#75
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 533 Joined: 23-July 03 From: outside America Member No.: 5,015 |
NASA? Why the americans? Russians have beaten them in about every space milestone: First object in space, first animal in space, first man in space, first woman in space, first spacecraft on the moon, longest stay in space, etc. Maybe america landed the first man on the moon, but really, if you want fast progress of our species into space certainly the Russians are the team to support.
And you'd need to get rid of Greenpeace or somehow make them oblivious to the massive pollution that launching rockets has on the environment. There's even a bullfrog that competes for females by belching the loudest and longest. Their population is plumetting. In a recent survey, all the male bullfrogs living near launch sites had severe depression; none of them can match 165 decibel output for 60 seconds, and so they have no chance of attracting a mate and just squat dejected in the sludge. So by all means, the conquest of space by our species, but think of the frogs! |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 12th April 2022 - 10:44 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.