Modular stations on the Moon and Mars

[willpittenger]

My biggest concern would be the safety of the joints. You can't allow them to flex as might happen if the various modules receive different levels of thrust. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[crix]

How about the regularity of the lunar surface? Would a platform with such a large leg base require a pre-leveled target landing area? Or could shocks/springs alone account for dips and general unevenness? <br /><br />If it were my lunar base I would prefer a real time LIDAR mapping systems (a la Darpa Grand Challenge vehicles) mounted on the bottom of the craft and an AI and enough fuel to assure the base could place itself as levely and securely as possible.<br /><br />Hopefully LRO data will be high enough res and released to the public so that very specific landign coordinate can be determined prior to the craft hovering 100s of feet over "luna firma."

 

[thereiwas]

Yes, "uneven terrain" is one thing; "elephant-sized boulder" is something else.

 

[crix]

Seriously. They'll need a very good understanding of the terrain they send the base-lander to.

 

[docm]

I would imagine data from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) will help with that. It's to map the whole moon for NASA's lunar landings and launches next year. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[windnwar]

you could always send a small dozer of some variety a few months ahead of the landing to help level out the area prior to bringing in the assembled structure. Later after the base is setup it could then be used as a transport vehicle or to do further excavations. As close as the moon is it could be controlled easily from earth a few hours a day for the site prep and charge the rest of the time. Combined with using LRO to pick a good landing spot, it would give you a great idea of the landing site, and any issues you might run into there. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font size="2" color="#0000ff">""Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein"</font></p> </div>

 

[crix]

I just did a quick search for the imaging specs and found the following info:<br /><br />1. ~25 m scale polar topography at <10cm vertical resolution from laser altimeter, with the rest of the moon mapped at lower resolution. (don't know what ~25m scale means...but 10cm vertical would definitely catch any pesky elephant size boulders)<br /><br />2. 1000's of 50cm/pixel images, and entire Moon at 100m in UV and Visible from camera<br /><br />So it seems that LRO will give a pretty comprehensive characterization of surface features. If data is available to US businesses (it damn well should be) Bigelow would be able to place his bases confidently.<br />

 

[gunsandrockets]

<There has been debate on how to design permanent stations for Mars and the Moon. One school of thought uses inflatable modules. They are small prior to inflation and don't mass much. However, they provide little shielding without help. Other people want to bury the modules. Unfortunately, such modules of a solid construction would make an ISS module look like light weight designs. You need a lot of structure to support the cover. That is heavy. A conventional design would also have to be shipped in one bulky piece.><br /><br />I've done a little googling on the subject of surface habitats previously and came away with different conclusions.<br /><br />There are two important factors to consider for a lunar/Mars habitat compared to conventional Earthside experience, and that is the lower gravity and vacuum/near-vacuum conditions. Because of these factors the structure needed to support radiation shielding is not anywhere near as much compared to structure needed to support an interior air pressure of 15 lbs/sq. in. How much easier is it to support a heavy shielded rooftop when there is a ton of pressure per square foot pressing upward on the roof, and rooftop shielding only weighs 1/6 as much as on Earth?<br /><br />Therefore taking into account the most efficient habitat would be the one that is the most efficient pressure vessel; supposedly the most efficient type of surface habitat in terms of mass and practical floor space is an inflatable torus, or something shaped like a donut. <br />

 

[holmec]

You know what? If the lunar soil can provide sheilding, then why not make a roof that's a frame and then fill up the roof with soil. You could partially burry the habitats in the soil and bulldoze the soil around. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Burying the outpost was brought up in the OP. However, you did not discuss how to pressurize the space. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[spacester]

"how to pressurize the space."<br /><br />Seal the interior, all the way around including the floor, with a thick coating of glass. A great big vacuum bottle with the vacuum on the outside. There would be openings for airlock installation. The rest is supply and operations. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[holmec]

Sorry. My assumption is that you have a module or many pressurized modules connected, or however. Then have a frame that covers the whole area and load the frame up with lunar dirt. So the idea is to separate the shield from the pressurized modules.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[holmec]

Interesting spacester, but glass is very heavy. Are you proposing to make glass on the lunar surface? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[kelvinzero]

As for moon caves, they would be very cool to find.<br /><br />Lets not rush in and convert them to a las vegas style tourist location for the super rich though <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />Their value as habitats vs their value to science or as natural treasures would need to be considered. In any case the first step would be to establish bases nearby.

 

[j05h]

<i>>> "how to pressurize the space."<br /> /> Seal the interior, all the way around including the floor, with a thick coating of glass. </i><br /><br />Is this for connected modules or building in-situ habitats? Modules are inherently sealed pressure vessels. Constructed habitats can take almost any form, depending on local situation. We've discussed glass before, it seems that near-perfect spheres of glass can be blown in zero-G. With silica, a forge and fine control over focussed, applied sunlight, extremely tough glass spheres could blown in many sizes. My suggestion is to use a sleeve as part of the "blowpipe" that is the only opening to the glass sphere. Depending on size, different types of airlock/control structures are inserted into the sleeve at completion. <br /><br />For applying glass inside a rock/crete dome or similar habitat, it might not be needed. Properly built the dome can be easily sealed, or ice-mud can be included in any shielding material. One glass option, my friend Asya did this in school, is to blow glass into a mold. Her mold was an abstract torso, ours would be an already fired superadobe sphere or half-dome. That is something that could be built on Mars or Luna. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[spacester]

Yes, holmec, I'm talking about regolith-sourced glass.<br /><br />My vision for the moon is a large dome built to last 'forever'. Something large enough to be seen with a really good home telescope from Earth, and built to withstand meteoroids at the level needed to make a killer one a once in a Billion year event.<br /><br />I do not suggest this be the main or only way that housing is provided on the moon, it's just my personal favorite.<br /><br />But it would allow you to strap on wings and fly.<br /><br />Anyway, yeah, JO5H has it nailed down. I'm thinking that if perfect spheres can be done in micro-g then big bubbles can possibly be blown on the moon. But my huge dome would be too large for that - I foresee a spray-on method or perhaps forms and casting. And he's right in that sintered basalt walls might not need any additional sealing. But I looked up the permeability of basalt once and it was enough to let out precious artificial atmosphere out. So I want to line it with glass as part of the 'lasts forever' criteria. Plus, you're going to have to seal the floor too, and I like a clear glass slab on top of the native rock if we can pull that off. Not that the glass liner on the walls needs to be clear: it will be likely be black and very mechanically tough. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>