Let's Design a Settlement for Mars!

arobie · May 23, 2005

Spacester, Thank you for clearing that up, preparing the way to complicate it with discussion. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Hmmm....Should the cargo lander stay at Mars, or return to Earth? Option One, Stay at Mars: The cargo lander would remain at Mars once it arrives. When new supplies and equipment arrive, it goes up, loads the supplies, and lands them. The supplies would have to be stored in modules (or whatever) during the jouney. -Pros- Propellant is saved by not forcing the IB to lug around the Cargo Lander every supply trip. The cargo lander will always be around for any heavy lifting that needs to be done. (??) -Cons- To transport cargo to Mars' surface, the cargo has to loaded onto the CL en orbit from the Transfer ship. Option Two, Return to Earth: The Cargo Lander would return to Earth with the IB after fulfilling it's duty to transporting the supplies to the surface. -Pros- The supplies and equipment can be loaded directly onto the cargo lander for the journey. When the IB and CL arrive at Mars, the CL can descend to Mars without the hassle of removing and loading cargo unto itself. -Cons- The IB has to use more propellant to transport the CL to and from Mars every cargo trip. I like option one with the CL staying at Mars. If we load the cargo into modules for the journey, then when they arrive at Mars, it is only a matter of unplugging supply modules from the transfer ship and plugging them into our CL. Seems to me the most efficient way to run that operation. What are your thoughts? I'm looking out for your outline and conclusions on this. Apparently you had a busy weekend like I? <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

arobie · May 23, 2005

Dan_Casale, Excellent! Down under the Interplanetary Spaceship, you have that we would need 672,000 kg of water. Going by the spartan life style in case of an emergency with minimum water with minimum recycling, we would need 290,640 kg of water for 28 people for 960 days if they used 12 kg per person per day with a 10% recycling efficiency. Bringing that much water, with no emergency occuring, the crew could consume 107 kg of water per person per day with their optimal 90% efficiency. We would be swimming in water! We can can reduce the amount of water we plan on bringing by almost 400 tonnes. We should go with the 290,640 kg of water figure. Under the surface habitats for 600 days, we need 181,776 kg of water instead of 420 tonnes of water Everything else looks great. We are slowly filling it in although everytime a new summary is posted, the requirements seem to get longer. *Scratches Head* <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /> The very beginning, before the outline is very good. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Thanks Dan! <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" />

dan_casale · May 23, 2005

Good catch Arobie. I have updated the post.

scottb50 · May 24, 2005

I see a lot of questions marks. Which is good. "?are lunar resources available? ?are Phobos resources available?" I would say no. Maybe, years down the road they might be, but why complicate a complicated situation by requiring unreasonable compromises? Why do we Have to go back to thre Moon to go to Mars? d) Particulate/odor removal ---------------I) Can a non-filter solutions be used? ---------------II) Can water be used as a filter? One use of Carbon is in filtration, once isolated it could be used for removing particulates and odors. Heating it could allow separtation of the components and re-use. The loss of a certain amount of Carbon, dumped overboard would not be that bad of a thing. The one excess that will develop, in the long haul, is Carbon, if it can't be used for building material, which it could be, it would have to be disposed of. "e) what telemetry, from what systems is returned?" "I) How many and how long?" I would think every bit of data available on board a vehicle or station should be available both there and at a control facility on Earth. There might be times it can't be real time, due to orbital positions, but I doubt that is a huge problem. "III) Size in KW?" How much power do we need? Solar power is available continuously enroute. The availability in orbit is reduced true, but still available. Solar can provide all the capacity needed, the only consideration is how we provide it when Solar is not available. This leaves two options: batteries or fuel cells. "I) How long can each storage method keep food safe? II) How to supply “fresh” food?" If we are looking at 2.5 year cycles then it's not a huge problem, canned, freeze dried or frozen foods would work. The weight and complexity required to produce fresh foods is another question. Is it worth the expense to get to orbit to begin with? Got to go, from a higher sour <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

dan_casale · May 24, 2005

>>"?are lunar resources available? />>?are Phobos resources available?" /> />I would say no. Maybe, years down the road they might be, but why complicate a complicated situation by requiring unreasonable compromises? >Why do we Have to go back to thre Moon to go to Mars? Try this crazy idea: A race between the moon supporters and the Mars supporters to see who can set up the first settlement. Also our plan should be adptable enough to take advantage of alternate sources of propellants. We don't have to develop them, just be able to take advantage of them. />>d) Particulate/odor removal />>---------------I) Can a non-filter solutions be used? />>---------------II) Can water be used as a filter? /> />One use of Carbon is in filtration, once isolated it could be used for removing particulates and odors. Heating it could allow separtation of the >components and re-use. The loss of a certain amount of Carbon, dumped overboard would not be that bad of a thing. The one excess that will >develop, in the long haul, is Carbon, if it can't be used for building material, which it could be, it would have to be disposed of. Carbon, good idea. I suggested water because it could be dumped into the waste water stream. No additional system is necessary, but carbon is a more effective filtering agent. I'll update the other post. I'll start to spec. the green house next.

dan_casale · May 24, 2005

Can someone wade through this and let me know what I missed? Assumptions: green house will be used to reclaim/recycle all grey water. There should be at least two degrees of separation between the grey water and a food source. The green house will consume CO2 and produce O2. There is too much radiation on the surface of Mars to grow plants. Thus all lighting will be artificial. The atmosphere of Mars is too thin to grow plants. Thus the green houses will be pressurized and artificial air circulation will be provided. CO2 will be filtered out of other compartments to enrich the atmosphere of the green house. Overview of processes: Grey-water: to swamp, to fish pond until evaporated. Human waste: to human waste compost pile, to swamp soil, to non-edible plants soil, to non-human compost pile, to edible plants. Non-human waste: to non-human compost pile, to edible plants. Animal wastes: to non-human compost pile, to edible plants Animal parts: same as human waste. Humidity: recovered from air, sterilized, treated and stored as potable water. to do's: figure power consumption figure water requirements figure space requirements determine testing equipment determine process checkpoint locations (telemetry) Plants: --edible: ----Wheat ----carrots ----broccoli ----beans ----peas ----cauliflower --input: ----Watered from potable water supplies. ----Light from green house lamps ----Air circulation by fans ----CO2 from humans and animals ----worms ----soil ----seeds --Output: ----food ----used soil to compost pile non-human --processes: ----till soil ----plant crops ----water plants ----harvest crops ----after 2 crops, recycle soil to compost pile non-human ----separate tools for edible and non-edible green houses, to prevent cross contamination. ----O2 removal ---

grooble · May 24, 2005

Maybe you guys could get a grant from NASA to do further research?

dan_casale · May 24, 2005

Grooble: that would be nice, but I think they have done a bunch of this research already. That post has some roots in their research and also in CELESS architecture. Unfortunately, I have no practical knowledge, only threory. But I hope to be putting up a green house within the next 6 - 12 months. I want to do some aquaculture and hydroponics, so in a couple of years I will be able to design a better system. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find enough data to indicate how big a green house would need to be to feed 28 people plus animals. Here are a few links to go with my last post. http://www.waterrecycling.com/index.htm http://www.greenhousegarden.com/Material%20properties.htm https://www.sundancesupply.com/index2.html http://www.cropking.com/greenhouse.shtml http://www.farmwholesale.com/panels.php3 http://www.igcusa.com/btu/kirkcalc.html http://www.quickgrow.com/gardening_articles/index.html http://www.hammacher.com/publish/67403.asp?promo=xsells# automatic chicken plucker http://www.schaferfarmsnaturalmeats.com/html/featherman.html livestock water requirements http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/bse/442-755/44</safety_wrapper]

grooble · May 24, 2005

Did you hear of www.aquaponics.com ? I think someone posted the link earlier on this thread or another. How about Camels?

dan_casale · May 24, 2005

Grooble: Thanks for the link. Why camels?

scottb50 · May 24, 2005

<<Try this crazy idea: A race between the moon supporters and the Mars supporters to see who can set up the first settlement.>> I see little difference between the basic components of establishing a base on the Moon or a base on Mars. It would definitely be an advantage to test concepts and improvements on the Moon, but to pit one against the other for funding? <> Anything you dump into the waste water will have to be filtered out at some point anyway if you intend to recycle it. That's why I still think hydrolysis and water is the way to go in so many ways, including propellant and electrical power. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

dan_casale · May 24, 2005

><<Try this crazy idea: A race between the moon supporters and the Mars supporters to see who can set up the first settlement.>> /> />I see little difference between the basic components of establishing a base on the Moon or a base on Mars. It would definitely be an advantage >to test concepts and improvements on the Moon, but to pit one against the other for funding? /> If the general public is providing the funding, something must grab and hold their attention. A good race always attracts a lot of attention. With attention comes money, with money comes progress, with progress comes hope for a better future. /> /><> /> />Anything you dump into the waste water will have to be filtered out at some point anyway if you intend to recycle it. /> />That's why I still think hydrolysis and water is the way to go in so many ways, including propellant and electrical power. It is simplier to dump the filtering water into the grey-water stream for processing than it would be to develop and maintain a process for creating and recycling an activated carbon filter. The hydrolysis/fuel cell cycle isn't lost on me. Hopefully I can find some good numbers by the time we get around to the power systems. I still have to guess at the power requirements for the green house mess I proposed.

scottb50 · May 24, 2005

<<The hydrolysis/fuel cell cycle isn't lost on me. Hopefully I can find some good numbers by the time we get around to the power systems.>> Where the amount of water makes a difference is in propullsion, not in electrical power generation. The same water could be used over and over indefinitely to power fuel cells. As long as you don't dump water overboard, where is it going? A fuel cell/hydrolizer system would be a sealed unit. The purity of the water could be ensured and fuel cell life would improve. What I have in mind is individual units, the power needs in a particular Module, or a section of a Module would be provided by self contained units that could be added to as needed. Simply mount them and plug them into a Solar power source. You get constant and consistant power output. Need more power in a certain area? Add more units. Obviously a Module used as crew living space wouldn't need as much power as one used for research. Why not provide the power needed on the spot? With no physical connections a failure in a system would not cascade throughout the entire system, if a unit fails it is simply replaced. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

arobie · May 24, 2005

Scottb50, How much power will one hydrolizer/fuel cell unit provide us with lets say for a day? How much mass is a single unit (estimate?)? How much power will they need from solar power to continue to run? Dan_Casale, I'm wading through your system, but it might take me some time to respond educatedly. I'm err...picking up life support ecosystems as we go along. From a glance, it looks good. Being from Louisiana, I like the crayfish. Good old fashioned crayfish boil on Mars. I'll cook! <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" />

scottb50 · May 25, 2005

http://www.asi.org/adb/04/03/03/h2power.html This gives some idea of what I have been talking about and some numbers to work with. I have found it hard to find accurate consumption figures for existing systems to quote from, but these sound pretty close. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

scottb50 · May 25, 2005

Also from this same site: http://www.asi.org/adb/04/03/03/rfc-data.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

grooble · May 25, 2005

a camel is the perfect creature for mars exploration, its body is adapted to such rocky, desert like conditions, just slap a suit on it and some oxygen tank. So you have a transportation method, as well as a scientific objective of studying the effects of the martian gravity on quadrapedal mammals. You could take a full grown camel on the journey, some don't need to drink water for 6 months! So it could load up before the journey and then go without for the entire trip. Worst case scenario, you could kill and eat the camel!

dan_casale · May 25, 2005

>Being from Louisiana, I like the crayfish. Good old fashioned crayfish boil on Mars. I'll cook! Arobie: If the water boils at 32 Deg. F. on Mars, how long will they take to cook? Scottb50: Nice links. That group has done some nice work. I wish they were making more noise. grooble: />a camel is the perfect creature for mars exploration, its body is adapted to such rocky, desert like conditions, just slap a suit on it and some >oxygen tank. /> />So you have a transportation method, as well as a scientific objective of studying the effects of the martian gravity on quadrapedal mammals. /> />You could take a full grown camel on the journey, some don't need to drink water for 6 months! So it could load up before the journey and then >go without for the entire trip. Worst case scenario, you could kill and eat the camel! See you have the perfect fund raiser, I think a lot of people would pay good money to watch someone try to put an environmental suit on a camel. The problem with larger animals is their physical strength. It might make them too dangerous to even take on the journey. I thought about bringing cows but I thing the bull in the china shop analgy applies.

adzel_3000 · May 25, 2005

Spacester, I think that this is a very well thought out thread. Good arguments all around. One concern I have about Mars settlement studies is the inherent assumption that humans can reproduce in a 1/3 gee field. Have there been any studies that look at human gestation in anything less than one gee? My concern is that a colony or settlement implies a growing community. The ability to reproduce is a big question mark for any colony. I do not find it personally acceptable to ask women or children to serve as guinea pigs. I think Gerard K. O'Neill was on the mark with his space habitat designs (some of which supplied one gee). This seems like a better way to "settle" space than to try to establish cities on Mars. Perhaps if humans cannot have children in anything other than a one gee field the planets will be used for science and resource retrieval and the O'Neill concept will flourish. Again, nice post. --A3K

grooble · May 25, 2005

Well hopefully the moon landings will have a mission such as breeding mice. Also, isn't the ISS supposed to do science like this?

adzel_3000 · May 25, 2005

I'm not sure if the ISS is geared to support much beyond mice reproduction. Most of the medical/biology experiments are geared toward long duration exposure to micro-gravity. Safe reproduction seems very much like an open question and not one that is readily answerable via a study. No one knows for sure whether people can safely have healthy kids on Mars. I would also be wary of those who would forge ahead with colonization schemes without having a certain answer. A "yes" to the question would allow such plans to move forward. But a "no" would require a major re-think as to what form space settlement should actually take. --A3K

arobie · May 25, 2005

Being from Louisiana, I like the crayfish. Good old fashioned crayfish boil on Mars. I'll cook! Arobie: If the water boils at 32 Deg. F. on Mars, how long will they take to cook? Hmm...I quess we're eating raw crayfish! Of course we could always cook inside our pressurized habitats. Hmm... <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> Adzel, I agree that a major question is whether reproduction in low-gee is possible. We will eventually find out. My personal hunch is that low-gee will not be too much touble for it, although I think zero-gee would pose a problem. But I cannot back that by any science. It is merely a hunch. I do hope it turns out that there are no major problems with reproduction in 1/3rd gee because a settlement is a growing community like you said.

grooble · May 25, 2005

Can 1g be re-created on the martian surface, a spinning base ?

henryhallam · May 25, 2005

Agreed - My WAG is that conception and gestation probably wouldn't be a problem, but during childhood muscle and bone development might be an issue even at Mars-level gravity, unless they made sure to have plenty of exercise. TBH I think it will be a long time, at least 75 years if we're lucky, before there is a lunar or martian *colony* well-equipped enough for permanent settlers and raising children. You have to have a hospital, a school, etc etc. which a burgeoning outpost or colony probably couldn't afford to support. Perhaps by that time we will have anti-bone-loss drugs.

adzel_3000 · May 25, 2005

You could set up some type of centrifuge. But would the expectant settler ride in it continuously or only a few hours per day? Is the gee field the only consideration for full term development? Is there something unique about the gee field that is required for brain development, muscle (and heart) growth, proper endocrine development, etc? Remember, the child is not isolated in the womb. It is in many ways symbiotic in the sense that it responds to the mother's ability to cope and adapt to her environment (ie, is her system stressed in any way by the <1 gee field?) We gestate the way we do based on millions of years of evolution. The gee field may be a huge factor in how all the other developmental factors come together. -A3K

Let's Design a Settlement for Mars!

arobie

Guest

arobie

Guest

dan_casale

Guest

scottb50

Guest

dan_casale

Guest

dan_casale

Guest

grooble

Guest

dan_casale

Guest

grooble

Guest

dan_casale

Guest

scottb50

Guest

dan_casale

Guest

scottb50

Guest

arobie

Guest

scottb50

Guest

scottb50

Guest

grooble

Guest

dan_casale

Guest

adzel_3000

Guest

grooble

Guest

adzel_3000

Guest

arobie

Guest

grooble

Guest

henryhallam

Guest

adzel_3000

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page