A Lunar Colony

[j05h]

I've been keeping SuperAdobe in the discussion because of it's simplicity for collection and construction. Cutting basalt will be a very energy intensive technique, stuffing bags with dust will be much simpler - grind, sort, stuff, transport. Following the blown-glass idea, making spheres of superadobe with blown-glass inner pressure vessel and a sintered crust outside could be a viable lunar industry in the mid-term. <br /><br />One of my friends was a glassblower in college, we were talking about the dome/bubble of glass as habitat last night. He says that molten glass (like water) will form a sphere from surface tension, gravity and air convection inhibit the process on Earth. If a ball of glass could be formed in vacuum, it would make a more even sphere. The eventual docking adapter is used as the plug to blow the bubble. With available material, in freefall, exceedingly large glass bubbles are possible. Lunar gravity will tend to distort blown glass, but large bubbles and domes should be able to be cast. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[spacester]

Yes, lava tubes have been looked into by the Oregon L5 Society. As a native Oregonian, I prolly should belong to that group. Elsewhere, I've discussed some of the reasons why not. One of the reasons is that I insist on focusing on the practical and the near term, and L5 has always been about things we could do up there "some day". Maybe that's changed since last I looked.<br /><br />"Some day", maybe we find lava tubes on the moon and take advantage of them. Meanwhile . . . <br /><br />JBIS papers . . . are they available, are they public domain? Are they just looking for a home on the web? Because I can find a home for them if that's the case.<br /><br />Those papers need to be ACCESSible <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />But the existing studies on all this stuff should not be taken as the last word on anything - we need new studies done on most space subjects.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spacester]

There is no doubt that superadobe needs to stay on the short list of lunar building technologies. It has a lot of advantages.<br /><br />The energy needed to cut basalt is a factor, I wish I had some numbers on that. My thinking there is tied up with the 'abundance mentality' approach I always try to use. Specifically, the idea is that we will need electricity generation anyway, right? And if we're building a large facility, dome or otherwise, it will need a lot of energy to operate, right? So let's set up the solar panels we need to cut and move the basalt, and then we'll have the power we need to do whatever we want when we're done with contruction.<br /><br />I know that this approach flies in the face of the current "minimum mass mantra" - this is a very intentional choice.<br /><br />Glass making, forming, casting and spraying all seems simple enough. But glass is not exactly a traditional material for pressure vessels. Well actually carbonated beverages come in an all-glass pressure vessel, but other than that, it's not normal engineering practice.<br /><br />At first glance structurally, a glass pressure vessel should be fine if it is well supported on the outside. What I'm worried about are stress concentrations - in areas where the glass bubble is not well supported on the outside surface, the glass could fail.<br /><br />If I want to build something that will last forever, that kind of problem needs to be eliminated. I am not convinced that superadobe is acceptable when compared to the rigidity and homogenaiety of basalt. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spd405]

JBIS papers . . . are they available, are they public domain? Are they just looking for a home on the web? Because I can find a home for them if that's the case.<br /><br />Those papers need to be ACCESSible <br /><br /><br />I have checked with them and they are discussing the possibility of putting them on-line for members.<br /><br />

 

[craig42]

Thin Aluminium/Titanium support struts might be able to take the load. The Hydrogen free environment for production combined with the lower Lunar gravity might allow stronger structures than possible on Earth. Glass has been used in building before the earliest I am aware of being the Crystal Palace in 1885. Granted no one has built a Glass pressure dome before but then no one has gone to the moon yet. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /> inside the crystal palace <br />A few more glass buildings. <br />Building One Building Two<br />Although they use tiles, this is a possibility but I'd prefer a single glass with some sort of metal skeleton. This building is probably the closest to my idea. Arch<br />

 

[grooble]

A recent nanotech breakthrough i read about claimed it could lead to glass that is several times stronger than what we have now.

 

[soccerguy789]

I have been looking at ways to turn the nasa lunar base into a lunar city for a long time. first off, I decided the cheapest way, assuming we dont get a space elevator or SSTO, is to build individual 12 man "houses" launched in a single space station node type module, upon l;anding, 4-6 inflating domes are ste out and inflated, they have 2 layers of plastic, and inflatable ribs. between the two layers, lunar concrete, or you're superadobe, ais poured. this offers radiation and micrmetiorite protection. if it works our, all needed funrature and what not is stored insode the node for transport, the moved out into the domes, which will function as living space and greenhouse space. these houses can then be rented out to companies, or other private groups. <br /><br />for us to produce the needed light, we would also need a good source of power. solar is nice, but I prefer fusion if available. i don't plan a solar panael prduction site yet, and i do plan helium 3 mining to start soon after these start poping up, so lets go with fusion. at this point, we can just keep sending these up, until we get about a hundred people or so, then we can start considering lava tubes. I like lava tubes. they are already there, and they can be huge! the only building you doo, is sealing the walls with concrete or superadobe, and building your buildings inside. no ned to build domes. <br /><br />"Quit complaining and start a revolution"

 

[craig42]

Has the existence of Lava Tubes been confirmed? If so my infomation is out-of-date and would appreciate a link if avalaible? Thanks!

 

[j05h]

Rilles (IIRC the term) have been photographed, the assumption being they lead into tubes.<br /><br />My issue with the "stick it in a lava tube" is that we have NO idea what the inside of those tubes is like. Better to trench/bury what you need instead of relying on an uncertain and potentially collapsing structure.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[soccerguy789]

That would always be an option if lava tubes don't work out. there would be plenty of surveying before anyone started building anything.

 

[nexium]

We can overdue the surveying and analysis. At some point we do a pilot project, then more analysis of the pilot project. My guess is we can find a way to make both the lava tubes and caves usable on the moon, Mars and many moons, asteroids and comets. We can find the caves and tubes easily even if there are very few of them. Neil

 

[nexium]

The solar furnace and the (Sandia type) solar power towers should be more practical on the moon than on Earth. Negligible convection (and wind) means less heat loss. Also the sun is hotter unless we have to pass the beams though glass. At the poles of the Moon (or poles of Mercury, which has even less tilt on it's rotational axis) the steerable mirrors will likely be higher than the power tower which can be as short as 3 meters. As mentioned on page 14, the regloth at the bottom of polar craters can cool the low pressure steam to 274 degrees k or a different working fluid to perhaps 100 degrees k. If the sun is below the horizon for a day,(another nearby mountain) still hot regloth (at high elevations) can warm the working fluid allowing some energy to be produced.<br />The Australian power tower will use several square kilometers of greenhouse which delivers hot air to make a strong updraft in a one kilometer chimney. I don't think it can be adapted to the moon, but the Sandia design has about 21 years of successful operation and can likely be both a solar furnace and an electricity source simultaneously. Neil

 

[spacester]

Check out the Power Lander from a couple of guys from Pratt & Whitney and sysRand.<br /><br />Circa 2004. It works for me!<br /><br />One Megawatt <b>total</b> powerplant, 25% of that is electricity (400Hz 3-phase DELTA) and 75% is thermal energy. It's targeted at ISRU processes that require a lot of heat energy to do their thing.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jatslo]

There is petroleum products on the Moon.

 

[spacester]

Why I do believe I am being baited into responding to a highly controversial comment! How fun!<br /><br />But anyway, how about that power lander? It's a great way to harness the power of the sun, don't you think? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[grooble]

What kind of rocket do you need to lift the lander?

 

[nexium]

Please someone give some details on how to make superadobe. Filling sand bags is more in line with realistic use of local materials than sawing basalt or making quality glass in several ton batches. My guess is we are limited to 3 or 4 complex high tech projects even if we have several hundred very talanted people in the colony. Errors will abound if we spread ourselves too thin and there are hundreds of easy things that are essentual, such as inspections of the sanitation, energy production and patching air leaks.<br />No baiting intended. I was commenting on 20 plus posts ago. Neil

 

[dan_casale]

Awsome! Another colony thread! There is some good information here that I haven't included yet but,....This is what a long post looks like......<br />(if I missed changing Mars to Moon someplace please excuse me.)<br /><br />Colonization systems<br /><br />A settlement requires a number of subsystems in order to be able to survive between supply shipments. The costs associated with the operating the settlement is inversely proportional to its ability to sustain itself, but the costs of setting up the settlement is directly proportional to its ability to sustain itself.<br /><br />NASA defines the nine required subsystems for a successful settlement as:<br />Electricity, Communications, Air Supply, Food production and delivery, Recreation, Temperature control, Transportation, Waste management, and Water supply. <br /><br />MISSION:<br />Moon Settlement Supports Moon Science; the more secure the people are in their ability to sustain the settlement, the more Science they can afford to do.<br />=============================================================<br />OBJECTIVES:<br />The ultimate objective is to Settle the Moon. <br />The initial objective is to encamp as many people as possible on the Moon. <br />Their primary job will be to stay alive. <br />Their secondary job will be to maximize the productivity of the chosen industries. <br />Their tertiary job will be to enable return trips for those who want to go back to Earth or LEO. <br />Once those needs are reasonably secure, their job will be to do Science. <br /><br />The primary objective for Spaceships, especially manned craft, is to keep people alive. <br /><br />The two other major categories of equipment are Habitats and Factories. <br />Habitats should be amply sized and built to last for decades. <br />Factories must see continuous improvement, whether by on-site enhancements by the settlers, or by the delivery of new and larger equipment. <br /><br />Utilization of local resources should be maximized, but realistic goals for the

 

[j05h]

superadobe on Earth (per calearth.org) is made like this: lay out a circle on your construction site, level it. Lay a course of sandbag (Calearth sells long rolls of bag that can be cut to length) for the base. The mix in the bags, IIRC, is 1/2 sand and 1/2 concrete mix. Lay several strands of barbed wire, then another course of sandbag. Build an igloo/dome or barrel-vaulted archways with the sandbags and barbed wire. Dr. Khalili calls it turning the weapons of war to peaceful use. Build your dome, wet down the whole thing thoroughly, then build a giant fire inside. Fire the structure, it turns into extremely sturdy pottery. Plaster the interior, add utilities and move in! <br /><br />On the moon, it's going to be a little different. I would guess the bags and barbed wire can be integrated into one rolled product. The stacking should be done by a singular "spinner" machine. The bags would be filled with lunar basalts instead of sand and concrete. The final treatment would be solar sintering, the sandbag material needs to hold together long enough to allow/enable the sintering. I would recommend any lunar superadobe project look at two more areas: spherical building instead of small domes and a chain or wire net to hold the whole thing together in case of failure. <br /><br />I agree on the small colony only being able to conduct a few large projects at a time. I'm not sure if this will lead to overspecilization or polymath colonists. One of the reasons I like these massive structure ideas is that they will reduce maintenance time vs tin-can bases. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[dan_casale]

stevehw33:<br />You are completely correct. On the other threads mentioned by Arobie (I think), I mention that Mining, Refining, and Manufacturing need to be added to NASA's list of systems. I also discovered that fire suppression and emergency response is not included on NASA's list. I have attempted to address it in that big post but, like most of the others, it is incomplete.<br /><br />The "lets design a mission to mars" threads would be several days of reading, but I think I have summarizied most of the stuff in my previous post. However, there is a lot of ship classification stuff (good detail) that needs to be added to the transportation section. I'm just not sure how to incorporate it into that format.<br /><br />Thanks for looking it over. Let me know if you have any other ideas and suggestions. I have been working on that list since before the great forgetting at SDC. It contains information from about 5 different threads. It has progressed far enough that I am thinking of using it for a paper. I have hopes of someday it will be in a good enough form to present at a conference.

 

[nexium]

Thankyou for the website on calearth and super adobe. Likely the quality varies with the composition of the local soil that is used. The website mentioned "no tree" This perhaps means a minimum of organic material in the soil. Obviously large trees next to the structure are likely to catch fire with a hot fire inside. I suspect too hot is possible with some kinds of soil. Much hotter inside than out may give poor results. I suspect the hot fire needs to be maintained for 8 hours or more, then cooled a few degrees per hour as quick cooling would produce cracks. Two or more solar mirrors may be helpful to keep the outside about the same temperature as the inside. Unglazed flower pots are made from clay rather than silicon dioxide = quartz sand or calcium carbonate = lime stone. I don't know the optimum ingredents of Portland cement. Charcoal would need to be heated to about 3000 degrees celsus to merge with some of the other ingredients, some of which boil at less than 3000 degrees c. I presume that is why organic material needs to be minimized. Using fiber glass bags, or CNT bags, rather than cotton bags might double the ability to resist micro-meteorites. "Wet down the whole thing" allows the cement to do what cement does. I suspect weting each row of bags before adding the next would be helpful. Curing for a week or more may be helpful before sintering, but keeping the surface damp for a week will be difficult in the vacuum of the moon. If no cement is used weting down may have little or no utility. Neil

 

[scottb50]

I have to continue pushing my water/Solar proposal.<br /><br />Group 1: Solar powered hydrolysis and fuel cells. Infinitely scalable, using modular plug-in modules, portable a moveable throughout Modules.<br /><br />Say you want manufacturing or other high energy uses you add more modules. With three power modules per structure minimum, additional modules could be added as needed. <br /><br />Triple redundancy throughout. <br /><br />Group 2:<br /><br />I would have three sources of water to hydrolizers, with two fed from sealed tanks and the other from the atmospheric/ biological system. Various discussed waste treatments to purified water could be used, culminating in purified water to run the hydrolizers and provide atmosphere and organic waste removal. <br /><br />Either way water provides the optimum solution. Use Solar power to convert it to Hydrogen and Oxygen and it covers both of the first two groups, group 3 would be more an on-going process, hopefully for the life of the project and beyond. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[craig42]

Great Post, very detailed, little Mars-centric though. <br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Why four teams? Well, it’s a big crew and they’re going to be in two separate habitats. If you leave it at two teams, you would have two leaders in opposition, better would be to have a team of 4 leaders make decisions. Tie votes among the 4 leaders would be broken by a 28-person vote. I’m looking for a system that’s simple, fair and designed to reach consensus. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />That's a nice idea, but in any situation other than an emergency (for which you want a clear cut command chain) Earth is just over 2 seconds away. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />In resources you've neglected to mention the regolith.<br /><br />As for communication. A Wireless Local Area Network at the colony, data and voice can be sent over IP. With the main server at the radio antenna. Until a satellite chain at HMO can provide direct links for handheld devices. Allowing every Lunar LAN to communicate with every other including the radio links with Earth. Eventually this can come to extend the Internet to the Moon.<br /><br />As for power, what is the point of an ISRU base if a fuel that must come from Earth powers it? I don't see Nuclear as a viable option unless it can be mined and refined on the moon. (With all the political problems that encompasses!) Plus, solar power should be easier to repair/maintain than having to worry about nuclear hazard gear to be shipped up there.<br />

 

[nexium]

"Earth is two seconds away" but can we trust our Earth leaders to make life and death decissions for Moon colonests? New Orleans and Missisippi/Katrina suggest colonists should make their own decissions.<br />The equivelent of geostationary for the moon has an orbital radius of about 240,000 miles, because of the slow rotation = impractical. We would have to use ion engines to hold position or something like Indium satellites.<br />From high points near the poles, the sun never sets, but Earth is below the horizon almost 1/2 of each Earth year. Neil

 

[dan_casale]

Thanks for the comments.<br /><br />Scottb50:<br /> />I have to continue pushing my water/Solar proposal.<br />I have included it as Energy storage system option #3.<br /><br /> />Group 1: Solar powered hydrolysis and fuel cells. Infinitely scalable, using modular plug-in modules, portable a moveable throughout Modules.<br /> />Say you want manufacturing or other high energy uses you add more modules. With three power modules per structure minimum, additional >modules could be added as needed.<br /> />Triple redundancy throughout.<br /><br />I'm not sure how much redundancy is too much redundancy, but I would think that three levels is about max.<br /><br /> />Group 2:<br /> />I would have three sources of water to hydrolizers, with two fed from sealed tanks and the other from the atmospheric/ biological system. >Various discussed waste treatments to purified water could be used, culminating in purified water to run the hydrolizers and provide atmosphere >and organic waste removal.<br /> />Either way water provides the optimum solution. Use Solar power to convert it to Hydrogen and Oxygen and it covers both of the first two >groups, group 3 would be more an on-going process, hopefully for the life of the project and beyond.<br /><br />Because the hydrolizers are an energy storage device, I would expect that the water would recycle and never leave the system. Water going into the hydrolizer needs to be very pure, any impurities will interfere with proper system operation.<br /><br />craig42:<br /> />That's a nice idea, but in any situation other than an emergency (for which you want a clear cut command chain) Earth is just over 2 seconds >away.<br /><br />Still, if the desire is an independent colony, they must be able to resolve all issues on their own. It was a suggestion by Spacester, and it seem to be a very workable solution, until the colony became very large.<br /><br /> />... little Mars-centric though. <br />Thanks. I have been working on it a long time.