Home arrow Forum
Latest posts of: A_M_Swallow
May 15, 2008, 10:57:08 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 50
16  Research / Rocketry / Re: Virgin Space on: January 30, 2008, 08:43:59 AM
Take care when using the prices on SpaceX's website.  The Falcon_1s will probably end up costing $12 million each with about the same again for launch and management costs.

p.s. Virgin Galactic's Space Ship 2 does not actually go into orbit.

The two craft advertised can be used as 2/3 of a LEO cargo launcher. Two and a half million dollars to lift 100Kg into orbit = $25,000/kg is still expensive.
17  Research / Inital Ribbon Spool, Counterweight / Re: Initial Spool/Counterweight craft: LEO to GEO on: January 30, 2008, 08:40:08 AM
The topic is LEO to GEO. Your delta V from the point of launch has already conquered gravity. Any incremental increase in the orbital VELOCITY will increase your orbit. The acceleration can be very low and still get the job done.

The climber is not in LEO.  LEO = Low Earth Orbit.

The climber may be in LEH (Low Earth Height).

LEO and LEH may be the save height but they are not the save speed.

It is the velocity of objects in LEO that cancels out gravity.
18  Research / The Ribbon / Re: The Ribbon and Heat Problems on: January 30, 2008, 08:31:46 AM

With all the issues of heat generated onto the CNT because of moving parts on the elevator and the difficulty in eliminating or reducing the heat, why not double the length of the ribbon and make a conveyor belt out of it.  Attach the elevator to the ribbon.  Put the rollers at the top and bottom and make them any size you want.  Move the rollers on the bottom (earth) and keep them cool there.  I don't think cooling will be an issue in space.  If weight of cargo is an issue, install boosters on the platform to "lighten" the load.  The same method may be used to install the final sized ribbon with the use of a "fish line". Very large electric motors may be used without adding to the weight factors of the platform.  I would suggest eliminating as much weight from the elevator platform as possible as this would in effect reduce the cost and stress on the CNT ribbon.
great day to you all
Mark 

The conveyor belt design of space elevator does solve many problems, unfortunately the ribbon needs to be made from an even stronger material.  One so strong that the ribbon can be made without tapering.  It is unlikely that even CNT will be that extra strong.
19  Achieving the Space Elevator / Science & Technology / Re: Moon to Earth (almost) space elevator on: January 26, 2008, 03:07:20 PM
I do not know hat the actual required GPa for untapered on the Moon is but for tapered it is some where in the 2 GPa to 5 GPa range.  M5 and Kevlar meet this strength.  Glass fibre just meets this standard and theoretical silica (SiO2) fibres and possibly aluminium fibres can do it untapered.  Silicon and aluminium are abundant on the Moon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_space_elevator#_ref-Cain_2004_1

Most of the material above L1 could be manufactured on the Moon.
20  Research / Science / Re: Terriforming Venus on: January 25, 2008, 10:52:13 AM
Fortunately the sun will not be turning into a red dwarf during our life times or even our grandchildren's lifetimes.
21  Achieving the Space Elevator / Science & Technology / Re: Ribbon Power? on: January 08, 2008, 05:14:36 PM

- During deployment, the two arms should be layered together and the ribbon deployed exactly the same way as Edwards' would, from GEO. Perhaps some glue could be used that is easily broken when oscillation is to begin.


An alternative way of deploying the double ribbon.

Fix one end of the double ribbon to the satellite.
Attach a weight to the centre of the ribbon's loop.  Keep the weight below GEO.
Reel out the other end.  Replace the reel as needed.
Eventually the weight will end up reaching the Earth.

To make the bottom of the ribbon easy to find the weight can be a lamp and radio fastened to a wheel.
22  Achieving the Space Elevator / Science & Technology / Re: Ribbon Power? on: January 08, 2008, 01:25:42 AM
With an oscillating double ribbon each side can be strengthened on alternative climbs.  So it takes two climbs to enhance the ribbon.

Since the climber is clamped to the ascending side it is the descending side that will be thickened.  There is a complication in that the climber changes sides every time the ribbon stops so each half of the ribbon consists of hills and valleys.  The next climb has to fill in the valleys.  This can be controlled by simply waiting until the required side is descending.
23  Research / Science / Re: Boron Nitride Nanotubes on: January 05, 2008, 06:45:56 PM
A New Scientist article about Boron nanotubes.

http://technology.newscientist.com/article/dn13143-boron-nanotubes-could-outperform-carbon.html
24  Achieving the Space Elevator / Science & Technology / Re: Ribbon Power? on: January 05, 2008, 06:05:00 PM
Spinning the ribbon pair may keep the two moving parts apart.  Unfortunately it is also likely to twist the pair together, particularly when starting and stopping.
25  Research / Science / Re: Solar Energy - Palau on: January 01, 2008, 10:57:00 AM
By Easter 2008 it should be possible to launch payloads weighing nearly half a tonne for about $10 million on a Falcon 1 rocket.  This should permit a constellation of several small microwave satellites.  The cost of designing and building the satellites and ground stations is a large separate cost.
26  Research / The Ribbon / Re: The Ribbon and Heat Problems on: December 21, 2007, 09:22:21 PM
We would love to make the ribbon a simple loop, this would solve a lot of problems, unfortunately the ribbon would break.

As for boosters the fuel for them would cause a very large increase in the climbers weight.  The rockets used by NASA are practically all fuel tank.  The large rockets are needed to move a capsule the size of a small truck 100 miles, on the flat road vehicles use a much smaller fuel tank.  Although a lot of the fuel is used to accelerate the capsule to 27,000 km/h.

The strength of materials is called the tensile strength and is measured in pascals.  Steel has a tensile strength of 2,000,000,000 Pa (or 2000 MPa) and carbon nanotubes 62,000,000,000 (or 62000 MPa).  The space elevator cable hangs down so a measure called the breaking length is important.  This is the length of material (in km) that can support its own weight.  The breaking length of steel is 25.93 km and the breaking length of carbon nanotubes is 4,716 km.  Pity the space elevator will be 100,000 km high.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_strength

Using a doubled back cable that rocks up and down to lift the cabin instead of an on board motor has been proposed, avoiding the heat problems, but this is just a dream until a super strength material has been invented.
27  Research / Alternate SE System Designs / Re: Launch loops on: December 16, 2007, 06:45:53 AM
The angular conveyor belt used to raise the payload into space can be a separate belt from the one used to accelerate the payload to orbital velocity.  This means that the part in the atmosphere can move at a much lower speed.
28  Research / Alternate SE System Designs / Re: Launch loops on: December 11, 2007, 12:21:23 PM
Edit: Actually, no, tungsten is no good. Ion energy here is proportional to mass, so a light element is preferrable. The best I can make out is Boron, with an energy at 14 km/s of ~11 eV and a sputtering threshold of 33 eV. Plenty of room to spare, here.

Boron nanotubes are nearly as strong as carbon nanotubes.
29  Research / The LiftPort / Re: Sky station on: December 05, 2007, 10:35:26 AM
Given water and sun light the sky station can generate its own hydrogen by electrolysis.
30  Research / Alternate SE System Designs / Re: Launch loops on: December 02, 2007, 01:32:33 AM
We have trouble building anything taller than Mount Everest.  Nano tubes do not help because they compress, although diamond may work.  We have not seen a magnetically supported tower more than a few feet high.

Given a mountain that was a 100 miles tall we could easily run a 3 g track in a tunnel up the side.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 50
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!

Login Form

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 15, 2008, 10:57:08 PM
Username: Password:
Login with username, password and session length

Forgot your password?