Let's Design a Settlement for Mars!

[spacester]

<font color="yellow">Would it be possible to have the "greenhouse" as part of the ship, to be used on the trip, but also have it as a detachable part, that is dropped, in full onto the surface to be integrated into the overall settlement? That way it is already set up and producing when it gets there. </font><br /><br />Not impossible but not easy. We're planning on having big cargo landers to set stuff down gently, so it's an option.<br /><br />The chief difficulty I see is that the greenhouse would have been operating at spin-g for months, just getting well established, then spun-down for arrival at Mars. Then you'd have the g-forces of landing, then you'd have to get it all going good again.<br /><br />Plus you have to detach that habitat from the rest of the ship and still make all the utilities work. An engineering nightmare.<br /><br />So I envision that the transfer habitat becomes the orbital habitat. The greenhouse could continue operations after spinning up in LMO and supply food. Maybe you harvest before arrival and re-plant before you send everyone down.<br /><br />ISPP should easily be able to support multiple trips to the orbital refuge to tend the plants, or we could try robotic gardeners, or simply leave crew in the refuge as gardeners.<br /><br />The surface greenhouse(s) should be up and running before settler arrival. Maybe a crop of potatos are harvested, then the crew plants a variety of stuff.<br /><br />The projects sound like fun. Does 'aquaponics' mean plants and fish together, or just plants? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[scottb50]

. . . why bother with a reactor?<br /><br />"Uh, cuz we need a lot of power and solar is not feasible on Mars. Are you thinking about some other source of energy that I'm not remembering?" <br /><br />Sorry, I don't want to take the time to change colors and such, and I have tried a number of different ways to get around it. I basically respond while reading the post and I thought quoting the post, or part of a post I was refering to, would convey the idea. Basically I'm just lazy.<br /><br />Solar is very feasible in Mars orbit, just as it is in LEO, lunar orbit, between either and most anywhere out to Uranus or so. <br /><br />If you use it to break down water to H2 and O2 you provide all the energy needed. Take the gasses down to the the surface and use fuel cells to provide electrical power. To expect to extract energy from lunar or Martian atmospheres or surface deposits is rediculous. To transport huge quantities of Hydrogen, ala Zubrin, to exploit Methane, the least efficient hydrocarbon available also makes little sense. Humans, or any living thing, will always need water, so why not combine that need with everything else? Maybe exploitable watewr will be found on Mars or even the Moon. But that would only make this idea easier, if not we have to take it from Earth and luckily we have a lot of water<br /><br />"The failure mode would likely be a premature engine shutdown coupled with the inability to start another engine in time to make the correction.."<br /><br />I would thing multiple engines would be running, it would be a matter of keeping enough running beyond their normal shutdown time to compensate for failures rather than having to restart them. this redundancy would also allow corrections, as you say. My idea is to vary the number of engines depending on the mass of the vehicle. The more Modules you add to the existing core the more engines you add. Making the engine Modular and easily attachable to the vehicle allows a lot of flexibility.<br /><br />Lets sa <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[arobie]

When we say "Greenhouse", are we thinking an actual greenhouse where we use the sun's energy? Is that possible, do we know ways to block or lessen the radiation recieved?<br /><br />Check out this thread on ISRU if you haven't seen it yet. Qzzq posted an excellent article about a new micro technology for ISRU. <br /><br />Also see today's headline SDC article about the same thing, with pictures.

 

[ldyaidan]

Aquaponics is fish and plants. The plants feed the fish, the fish feed the plants.<br /><br />http://www.aquaponics.com/InfoAquaponics.htm<br /><br />Here's some good basic info. How this will work in lower, 0, or spin G, I have no idea.

 

[spacester]

Scott, I understand the concepts.<br /><br />I like the concepts.<br /><br />I'd like to use nothing but solar. Besides all the benefits you list, it would let us get the settlement going much sooner.<br /><br />But in my engineering judgment, it is not feasible. It just isn't. I have asked you several times in as many ways as I know how to SHOW ME THE NUMBERS.<br /><br />I'm pretty sure you have been told the watts per square meter on the Martian surface,and people have patiently explained about obvious things like night-time and sandstorms. <br /><br />In your scheme, solar is the primary source of energy. In mine, solar / fuel cells are the back-up system, where the fuel cells are powered by stored energy from the nuke plant. We want a robust settlement where people are not a single failure away from going into survival mode. Can solar do that? I don't think so. Show me the numbers.<br /><br />Heck, even the ramp-launch folks are starting to provide numbers to back up their schemes, so it's not too much to ask of you, is it? <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[north_star_rising]

Why thank you kindly sir! ;-)<br /><br />And, the International Space Agency sees, and proposes, Nuclear as the Core Power Resource, and Solar & Wind as back ups.<br />

 

[spacester]

<font color="yellow">An actual greenhouse?</font><br /><br />I dunno. I'm assuming as a baseline that it would have no windows and use artificial lighting. But I would love to see solid research or just ideas on how to use sunlight more directly.<br /><br />My pet idea on the "greenhouse" is to have plants everywhere throughout the habitable volume - make the whole thing a greenhouse, almost all of it anyway. It would be easier than worrying about segregating the high-CO2 and low-CO2 atmospheres for plants and humans, and you could find an optimum CO2 level for both together as a system. Plants don't have to be in hydroponics to be useful, so you could have plant pots all over the place. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spacester]

<font color="yellow">Aquaponics</font><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />I don't even know where to begin. Let's just say that I'm all over this concept of plants and fish. Give me a few more months and you'll see why I get all smiley about plants and fish. Hint: in my profile, I list "inventing" . . . .<br /><br />I want to be the first guy to maintain an aquarium off-planet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[scottb50]

"I'm pretty sure you have been told the watts per square meter on the Martian surface,and people have patiently explained about obvious things like night-time and sandstorms."<br /><br />I thought I had been clearer also. I have no intention of using solar power on the surface, it would be used in orbit and gasses would be transported down to the surface for use. <br /><br />"We want a robust settlement where people are not a single failure away from going into survival mode."<br /><br />What if your reactor fails? Are you going to have multiple reactors? <br /><br />As for numbers that would depend on the size of the facilities and the overall electrical requirements. It should be fairly simple to work up numbers using existing equipment for reference.<br /><br />http://www.fuelcellstore.com/cgi-bin/fuelweb/view=Item/cat=11/product=555<br /><br />http://www.fuelcellstore.com/cgi-bin/fuelweb/view=Item/cat=9/product=808<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spacester]

It's the transport of gases I have a problem with. Sorry, I definitely was not clear on that.<br /><br />Mars' gravity well is not small. We'd be wasting too much energy to transport our energy. The native resource is CO2, it is accessible only from the surface, we need power to process the CO2 into stuff we can use (of whatever efficiency), surface based solar doesn't perform, we need a surface based power station as primary power. It allows us to store vast quantities of energies integrated throughout the settlement.<br /><br />If our reactor fails, we tap those reserves until we get it running again. If your transportation system fails, we are relying strictly on what we have on hand. The cost of building those same energy reserves with orbital solar is prohibitive.<br /><br />Mars orbit solar should definitely be used on the orbital refuge. That would allow us to take the small nuke we brought with us to the surface and have redundant nuclear power at the settlement.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">It should be fairly simple to work up numbers using existing equipment for reference. </font><br /><br />Ayup. 6 MW Nuclear plant. Wasn't it you that posted it in the first place? <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[arobie]

ldyaidan,<br /><br />I'm looking forward to your thread on getting schools involved. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Cool site on aguaponics, thanks!<br /><br />spacester,<br /><br />Ok, I'm glad to see that we are on the same footing with greenhousing. I also assume it would have to be closed off with artificial lighting, and like you, it's because I have not seen anything solid using direct sunlight.<br /><br />I also saw plants being everywhere, just the way <i>I</i> visualised it. Although I didn't particularly think about the CO2 distribution, I more saw it that way because I just liked it better. I saw it to where we would still have our main hydroponics, but we would also have plants spread throughout the ship, making the entire ship more roomy, more like home. I figured it would not be the most economical way of doing it, separating those from the hydroponics...aguaponics, but I thought it would be great for the psychological benefit it provided.<br /><br />Now Mr. Inventor, you will have to let us in on what you are doing with aguaponics! A few months is a while, but hey, the first thing a space enthusiast learns in patience. I guess I can wait that long.<br /><br />Now, on to that nuclear reactor, just a <i>rough</i> approximation: How much will it mass?<br /><br /><font color="yellow">I want to be the first guy to maintain an aquarium off-planet.</font><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />Absolutely awesome! With your enthusiasm, your adept plan, and the hard work and time you are putting into this and will continue to put into this; you just might accomplish your goal! You have very high goals with this whole thing, but you have to aim high to go high. I wish you the best of luck, and am giving my own help and support!<br /><br /><i>Shoot for the Moon...er Mars, even if you miss you will land among the stars.</i>

 

[dan_casale]

Here is some of the latest tech for sterling cycle technology.<br />Uses RTG heat sources <br />http://stirlingtech.com/products/rg55.shtml<br /><br />Supplies cryo temperature cooling for keeping that Hydrogen liquid.<br />http://stirlingtech.com/products/coolers.shtml<br /><br />This one has been operated on solar power at NREL<br />http://stirlingtech.com/products/rg1000.shtml <br /><br />UPS type system that has no batteries:<br />http://www.activepower.com/index.asp?pg=technology_tacas_basics<br /><br />A turbine engine system<br />http://www.phoenixnavigation.com/phoenix.htm<br /><br />A communication encryption system:<br />http://www.phoenixnavigation.com/asksecurity.htm<br /><br />A navigation system:<br />http://www.phoenixnavigation.com/coretech/navsystems.htm

 

[j_crockett]

Great thread ... I finally read the whole thing.

 

[j_crockett]

It seems to me that a lot of thought has been put into the insitu resource utilization in order to make fuel for transportation which I think is great. I think that the long term success of the settlement will require other materials as well such as iron, aggregates, glass, concrete. These materials are lying around on the surface. We would require some foundry equipment to start but this equipment is low tech and easily reproduced. This could be a starting point for building large, strong and well protected habitats, laboratories and factories. <br /><br />The process of transforming Hematite blueberries into re-bar is not particularly foreign to us. Glass is made of melted silica. Concrete can be made from regolith material once the first two are removed. These processes may be a bit energy intensive. And , I am making some assumption about the availability of water ice that we can exploit for industrial purposes. <br /><br />I just though when they anounced that the blueberries are made of Hematite that it looked to me like an invitation.

 

[grooble]

http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=tech&Number=217200&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=<br /><br />Any use for these nuclear batteries in the plan?

 

[R1]

I would like to point out if I may that we should try to use today's Nasa's design currently used for the space station modules, in other words to simply design space station type of modules, make them fit for martian orbit, and to get them to LEO first and then to martian orbit.<br />there's no need to try to do what the United Space Alliance is already doing, as far as propulsion modules, cxv,s etc.<br />theres a simple reason, build your modules with the same launch parameters/<br />requirements, dimensions, etc, and they can go up with existing technology, include standard docking, and and you become more compatible with NASA<br />and Russia.<br /><br />Today's space station modules are still scheduled to go up one way or another, we just don't know yet if<br />they will all go up in the shuttle or go up in expendable unmanned rockets, but<br />I think NASA will have the expendable launches do at least some of the modules<br />in the near future, which means the technolology is here and now either way, as far as being able to send space station modules to LEO.<br /><br />Basically just obtain the launch parameters, the skeleton dimensions, etc.<br />and design them for martian orbit, and get them built. <br />At first this means you would have only created the ISS cousin in martian orbit,<br />but thats the best way,a nd eventually you may have one so big to be called a settlement habitat anyway. The technology is here, but it's just that no-one is drawing pictures an blueprints of modules with launch design to be able to go up in a shuttle launch , they could have already been there by now, or at least parked at the ISS, awaiting a propulsion module for shipment to mars.<br /><br />I realize you said to keep NASA out because of something like they don't get<br />things done, but we are running a little late, NASA will get the lunar-martian mandate done.<br />All anyone can do now is just help, rather than trying so hard to duplicate NASA.<br />It's just harder for different o <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[north_star_rising]

John1R, that is what the International Space Agency is all about! Moving National Space Agencies & Efforts and Private Organizations, Institutes, and NGO's/NFP's at least moving in the same direction and enabled and facilitated by a core neutral organization, instead of head to head as is, and has been for 20+ years, now done today!<br /><br />http://www.international-space-agency.org<br />http://www.international-spaceplane-program.org<br /><br />Also, for "ANY" Orbital, Luna, or Mars Exploration, Stations/Bases, or Efforts of any Scale or Tempo, a Robust International Orbital Space Launch Infrastructure of Scale & Effectiveness needs to be established. Other wise "ANY" Hopes or Dreams of Orbital, Luna, or Mars Exploration, Stations/Bases, or Efforts of any Scale or Tempo, will never be able to be achieved!<br /><br />Please see these two threads on Space.Com which address this issue and problem.<br /><br />Assisted Space Launch Systems Are Needed Badly! <br />http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=missions&Number=206964&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=<br /><br />Space Launch Poll -&- Idea, Concept, Design Challenge<br />http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=businesstech&Number=217709&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=<br /><br />

 

[arobie]

North_Star_Rising,<br /><br />Will you please not advertise the I.S.A. on this thread?<br /><br />This thread is about us designing a plan for settling Mars.<br /><br />Thanks. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[grooble]

Will anything come of this plan? Is there a next step?<br /><br />Maybe it could be converted into a business and technical plan, with all your names on.<br /><br />So you'll have a plan, and every now and then it could be revised as new discoveries are made and new technology made available. <br /><br />It just seems a shame that the mars settlement threads would come to an end, i really enjoy reading them.<br /><br />If you had a solid plan, you could share it with experts in the various feilds that the plan covers, get them to offer advice and refinements.<br /><br />Maybe some day in the future you guys might get together and follow through on it?

 

[arobie]

Grooble,<br /><br />I don't think these threads are dead. I'm not finished with them!<br /><br />I've been busy this past week as it is the last few weeks of school right now. I know spacester is also busy right now. He announced it on one of these threads somewhere.<br /><br />We are merely at a lapse in posts right now, but thank you for the bump. I'm going to have to make time right now for this. Who needs to study for tomorrow's biology exam? I'll study tomorrow morning...it's not too hard.<br /><br />I think we are still far from being able to write a bussiness and technical plan. We still have alot to work on.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Maybe some day in the future you guys might get together and follow through on it? </font><br /><br />I <i>think</i> that's somewhere in the plan. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> I would love to follow through on it someday. (to spacester:How soon is that 'someday' that we follow through on the plan?)<br /><br />Above you posted about the nuclear batteries. I'm sure we will have uses for those. They sound awesome.<br /><br />Dan_Casale,<br /><br />Thanks for the links.<br /><br />John1R,<br /><br />I really (sadly) don't know enough about the ISS modules, but my first impression is that they would not fit our needs. They were built for Earth Orbit with constant resupply. They were not built with oxygen and food efficiency in mind. We need to be as efficient as possible.<br /><br />The ISS modules were designed with different requirements for different conditions than what we need.<br /><br />The last paragraph of your post would best be discussed on the Mars Settlement Precursor Thread, if you wouldn't mind starting up conversation on that thread again for us. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[arobie]

j_crockett,<br /><br />Welcome to the thread. I'm glad you have gotten time to read the entire thing. Continue with us and make sure to share what you think. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br /><font color="yellow">I think that the long term success of the settlement will require other materials as well such as iron, aggregates, glass, concrete.</font><br /><br />I agree with you, and I agree with you that we should make steel from Hematite and glass and concrete from regolith.<br /><br />The settlement would then have to capability to grow and expand as it wants to and not just when we can send habitats to it and so forth.

 

[arobie]

Spacester,<br /><br /><font color="yellow">In fact, maybe LMO repropping isn’t even needed – maybe the cargo landers (second stages of the 2-stage interplanetary cargo hauler) get their ISPP refill right where they landed. That refill gets them to HEMO for re-mating with one of the Interplanetary Boosters.</font><br /><br />Ok uhh...that's a change in the settlement plan and along with it comes problems, but I would be scared if they didn't appear so here we go...<br /><br />So the cargo lander basically just became our repropping vehicle. A couple of problems crop their heads up at that proposition. <br /><br />The first is fitting the cargo lander to transport propellant. We would have to provide tanks that we could attach to the lander to transport the propellant. If we plan on topping off the Interplanetary Booster (IB), then those tanks would have to be huge. In fact, they would end up being prohibitively huge. To top off the IB, the Cargo Lander's propellant transfer tanks would have to be as big as the IB's tanks. We would not <i>have</i> to top off the IB, although we do want to. The minimum propellant we could provide the IB with would be just enough to get it home empty, carrying no cargo. Of course if we are sending a payload back to Earth...such as people, we would have to provide more propellant or even top it off.<br /><br />The second challenge is providing the Cargo Lander the capability to transfer all the propellant to HEMO. It's own propellant tanks used for the burns to slow down for deorbit & landing and to launch into orbit would have to be pretty big in order to carry all the propellant needed to transfer enough propellant to fill up an IB.<br /><br />A thought: Most of the mass of a booster are the tanks and propellant in them. If we are to transfer all the propellant to top off an IB in one go of a cargo lander, it would almost be like launching a filled IB into HEMO to reprop the real IB. Because of that, we would have to use more than o

 

[dan_casale]

Here is an interesting link to some NASA opensource software.<br />http://opensource.arc.nasa.gov/

 

[spacester]

Hey Arobie, just a quick post, I hope to spend some real time on this over the weekend . . . <br /><br />I wasn't suggesting we use the cargo lander as the re-prop vehicle. That leads to the problems you describe, basically, I think of it as "mission creep". You want a vehicle to do lots of things, but wisdom dictates that if you try to do too many things with one space vehicle, you end up doing everything poorly.<br /><br />Notice the "maybe" in that paragraph . . . <br /><br />Let's look at the cargo lander (CL). The essential mission is to land large masses on the surface of Mars. The Settlement strategy dictates that it is re-used as much as possible and that it be powered by propellant made at Mars. It is the second stage of our interplanetary cargo ship. We want the first stage (the IB) to stay in HEMO because we want to send it back to Earth for another mission. But does the CL go back to Earth with it?<br /><br />We have a lot of options on the logistics of using the cargo lander. If I had the time right now, I'd outline the choices and my conclusions. But I don't, I gotta go, more later. I just wanted to clarify that in my mind the Cargo Lander is NOT the re-prop vehicle.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[dan_casale]

Danger: long post.<br />I tried to summarize everything to date.<br /><br />Mars Settlement Supports Mars 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 Mars. <br />The initial objective is to encamp as many people as possible on Mars. <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 the Moon. <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 extraction and application of local resources must be set as well. <br />=============================================================<br />VISION<br />The purpose is to settle Mars, to begin a colony if practical. This means a good number of people need to stay for multiple cycles. Certain people would intend to never go back, of those some would and some wouldn’t; others might commit to a five-year hitch (twice the “typical” 2-1/2 year round trip). If enough long-timers develop, so does the viability of the settlement. <br /><br />It is readily apparent that the outlined approach will require the delivery of large payloads to the Martian surface. Parachutes will not do the job. The only readily available technology to do the job is rocket engines burning some kind of storable propellant. <br /><br />The mission design is h