ive been trying to find info on how ppl believe the station will be
built. so far ive yet to see anything outside of sf. can anyone direct
me to how it would be done.

personally i think it would be build like a bridge, with no end

From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert

> ive been trying to find info on how ppl believe the station
> will be built. so far ive yet to see anything outside of sf.
> can anyone direct me to how it would be done.

It's interesting; for some reason there seems to have been very little
thinking done on the construction sequence. I remember when I was in
the seminar with O'Neill one question I asked was what the exact
sequence should be (construct hull, pressurize, rotate would be my
guess). O'Neill threw it back out to the other students for discussion,
but then we moved on to another topic and never came back.

> personally i think it would be build like a bridge, with no end

I've heard that comparison made sometimes, both for O'Neills and for
Niven's "Ringworld".

Regards,

Mike Combs

hi

we are working on kalpana ones construction sequence too so any suggestions are most welcome.

nittin & ankur

From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert

> ive been trying to find info on how ppl believe the station
> will be built. so far ive yet to see anything outside of sf.
> can anyone direct me to how it would be done.

It's interesting; for some reason there seems to have been very little
thinking done on the construction sequence. I remember when I was in
the seminar with O'Neill one question I asked was what the exact
sequence should be (construct hull, pressurize, rotate would be my
guess). O'Neill threw it back out to the other students for discussion,
but then we moved on to another topic and never came back.

> personally i think it would be build like a bridge, with no end

I've heard that comparison made sometimes, both for O'Neills and for
Niven's "Ringworld".

Regards,

Mike Combs

From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nitin Arora

> we are working on kalpana ones construction sequence too
> so any suggestions are most welcome.

I think my reason for supposing construct hull > pressurize > rotate
would be that obviously an advantage of pressurizing as soon as you have
a hermetic hull is that further work on the interior can be done without
spacesuits. The original atmosphere would probably have lots of oxygen
(a "waste product" of the ore-reduction process) and little or no CO2,
and I think it might be breathed a good many months before significant
amounts of CO2 could build up (and at some point you're going to be
introducing green plants which will need CO2 to grow and multiply).

Some kinds of work on internal furnishings might be better done in 0-G,
but I think doing them at a very early stage of the spin-up process when
the centrifugal force is like 1/20 or 1/10 of a G might convey some of
the advantages of 0-G and some of the advantages of gravity. It would
be good to be able to set objects down on a surface and have them still
be there the next day, but very low gravity would probably be nearly as
advantageous for moving heavy objects as no gravity.

At one point I was questioning the wisdom of pressurizing before
starting the rotation, realizing that the air will be initially
stationary and will only start turning with the habitat through friction
with the ground (and not all at once, either). I wondered if this would
create inconveniently-strong winds inside. But I finally decided this
concern was a bit silly, given that the spin-up process will last
several months (probably even in excess of a year).

Regards,

Mike Combs

Hi,

I believe a space settlement has to be design like a city. That is,
a space that can grow with time. Like an evolving organism that is
never quite new or quite finished.

Let's study the case of a real city, New York or Tokio or any large
city of the world.

They started like small towns and little by little they started to
grow. The sewer system is quite old, the power and communitation
infrastructure is newer, and the traffic networks have evolved with
time. Building arose and were torn down. Everything changes but
showhow a general plan remains the same.

A large scale space settlement would have to be though in the same
fashion. Not like a ship or a building that is made once and then
forgotten, but like a living thing that will require space to grow
and the flexibility to change with time.

And all these changes have to happen while still is functional and
working.

Regards,

Omar Vega

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Combs, Mike"
>
> From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nitin Arora
>
> > we are working on kalpana ones construction sequence too
> > so any suggestions are most welcome.
>
> I think my reason for supposing construct hull > pressurize >
rotate
> would be that obviously an advantage of pressurizing as soon as
you have
> a hermetic hull is that further work on the interior can be done
without
> spacesuits. The original atmosphere would probably have lots of
oxygen
> (a "waste product" of the ore-reduction process) and little or no
CO2,
> and I think it might be breathed a good many months before
significant
> amounts of CO2 could build up (and at some point you're going to be
> introducing green plants which will need CO2 to grow and
multiply).
>
> Some kinds of work on internal furnishings might be better done in
0-G,
> but I think doing them at a very early stage of the spin-up
process when
> the centrifugal force is like 1/20 or 1/10 of a G might convey
some of
> the advantages of 0-G and some of the advantages of gravity. It
would
> be good to be able to set objects down on a surface and have them
still
> be there the next day, but very low gravity would probably be
nearly as
> advantageous for moving heavy objects as no gravity.
>
> At one point I was questioning the wisdom of pressurizing before
> starting the rotation, realizing that the air will be initially
> stationary and will only start turning with the habitat through
friction
> with the ground (and not all at once, either). I wondered if this
would
> create inconveniently-strong winds inside. But I finally decided
this

perhaps ringworld is where i heard of it. dont remember. but the
image has stuck in my mind.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, Nitin Arora
>
> hi
>
> we are working on kalpana ones construction sequence too so any
suggestions are most welcome.
>
> nittin & ankur
>
> From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
>
> > ive been trying to find info on how ppl believe the station
> > will be built. so far ive yet to see anything outside of sf.
> > can anyone direct me to how it would be done.
>
> It's interesting; for some reason there seems to have been very
little
> thinking done on the construction sequence. I remember when I was
in
> the seminar with O'Neill one question I asked was what the exact
> sequence should be (construct hull, pressurize, rotate would be my
> guess). O'Neill threw it back out to the other students for
discussion,
> but then we moved on to another topic and never came back.
>
> > personally i think it would be build like a bridge, with no end
>
> I've heard that comparison made sometimes, both for O'Neills and
for

sorry for making to post. got messed up on this.

the way i in vision the station being created is a small station
first not even as big as the hub of the big one. perhaps less than
100 feet across.

it would be created by expanding a balloon that had rigid rings
(likely made of pressurized tubes for easy of transportation. this
would be spun up to speed then waste material from either the moon or
from a neo would be spread over the bottom. this would create a good
radiation shielding capable of protecting from the worse solar storm.
then aluminum would be spread out over it and electronically melted
to form a solid air tight floor. walls would have to be done some how
similar. two large air locks would allow material to be brought in
and then sent though after being worked. the crew would be able to
build things like elevator shafts and corridors while in complete
safety. once finished these would be sent out to be connected to
other completed pieces, connected like an accordion. once several
spokes were finished, the ends would be allowed (they are spinning)
to move outwards by a slowly released cable connected opposite ends.
this would cause the entire structure (not connected to the work
station) to adjust its spin rate so that the outer end would be at
just above g centrifugal force (or how ever you wish to call that: it
will feel like a bit more than 1 gravity).

after this the inter connecting pieces would be lowered though the
elevators (going in both directions to maintain balance. upon
reaching the outer edge cables would hold it at the right distance
and while pins connecting the ends would allow them to hold together.
with them going from both sides they would meet in the middle. once
pinned they would effectively become a single piece. the spin and
inertia would cause then to stay in place as all would have a simular
pull outwards.

when several lines are made they would have their ends over lapping
with the next being a few feet farther down the line. plates would be
layed over these, and connected to ones below. this would effectively
create a road from one tower to the next. the first one would be a
construstion ring. slightly bigger than the intended living one. with
a road that was solid (perhaps more that one level to make it more
stable and allow construction on more than one lvl) construction
machines would have an easier time building the new frame for the
station. this would allow it to move things much easier and would
allow constructions skills learned on earth to be used. once the
based of the living station is created pressure hulls could be build
on it. they would not have to extend the entire length of the ring
for them to be useable. this would allow the station to become
operatable much sooner, and pioneers would be on station within years
of the start of construction rather than decades.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, Nitin Arora
>
> hi
>
> we are working on kalpana ones construction sequence too so any
suggestions are most welcome.
>
> nittin & ankur
>
> From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
>
> > ive been trying to find info on how ppl believe the station
> > will be built. so far ive yet to see anything outside of sf.
> > can anyone direct me to how it would be done.
>
> It's interesting; for some reason there seems to have been very
little
> thinking done on the construction sequence. I remember when I was
in
> the seminar with O'Neill one question I asked was what the exact
> sequence should be (construct hull, pressurize, rotate would be my
> guess). O'Neill threw it back out to the other students for
discussion,
> but then we moved on to another topic and never came back.
>
> > personally i think it would be build like a bridge, with no end
>
> I've heard that comparison made sometimes, both for O'Neills and
for
> Niven's "Ringworld".
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike Combs
>
> Science
kits Science
kid
exploration
>
Service.
>
FareChase

I'll be working on a paper describing one approach to building Kalpana One
this summer for an AIAA conference in the fall. The basic idea is to start
with a balloon and spray metal and glass on it. The spray is used to
rotate and control a structure build completely around the balloon that
holds multiple sprayers. The long axis of the cylinder must point towards
the sun to use concentrated sunlight to vaporize feedstock bars. This
means that Kalpana One must be turned to it's operational orientation with
the cylinder axis aligned with the solar system's north-south axis (for
thermal reasons).

At 11:23 PM 5/14/2006, you wrote:

question, are you planning on spraying the material on the outside of
the balloon or inside. if its outside i would think that the spray
would dissipate or freeze before it melded with the previously
sprayed material. if its inside, you might have to have something to
remove the heat. in addition if its a large balloon, having very much
material on one side could upset the rotation and shape of the
balloon. a thin layer, repeatedly added to by successive layers might
do the trick.

another problem is with the melding of glass and metal since they
will cool at different rates. a thin layer might help here, but that
might mess up the ability of the glass to have a clear image. in
addition, your going to have problems with expansion and contraction
of the glass and metal as it cools, and heats from the sun. if the
station is very large you might consider rock as a substitute for
metal since it would not expand the same, and the larger size of the
rock would mean that it would have better heat sink capacity. some of
the material brought back from the moon indicates (if memory serves
me correctly) that it has the material to make a form of concrete.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, Al Globus wrote:
>
> I'll be working on a paper describing one approach to building
Kalpana One
> this summer for an AIAA conference in the fall. The basic idea is
to start
> with a balloon and spray metal and glass on it. The spray is used
to
> rotate and control a structure build completely around the balloon
that
> holds multiple sprayers. The long axis of the cylinder must point
towards
> the sun to use concentrated sunlight to vaporize feedstock bars.
This
> means that Kalpana One must be turned to it's operational
orientation with
> the cylinder axis aligned with the solar system's north-south axis
(for

At 10:41 PM 5/17/2006, you wrote:
>question, are you planning on spraying the material on the outside of
>the balloon or inside. if its outside i would think that the spray
>would dissipate or freeze before it melded with the previously
>sprayed material. if its inside, you might have to have something to
>remove the heat.

I always assumed outside, but inside is certainly worth considering. I'm
not sure how you would get power to the inside though, and it would
constrain the size of mirrors for solar furnaces to vaporize material.

>in addition if its a large balloon, having very much
>material on one side could upset the rotation and shape of the
>balloon. a thin layer, repeatedly added to by successive layers might
>do the trick.

I had in mind a large number of sprayers on a ring structure around the
settlement. That way, material is deposited more-or-less all the way
around the balloon simultaneously.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, Al Globus wrote:
>
> I always assumed outside, but inside is certainly worth
considering. I'm
> not sure how you would get power to the inside though, and it would
> constrain the size of mirrors for solar furnaces to vaporize
material.
>
> I had in mind a large number of sprayers on a ring structure around
the
> settlement. That way, material is deposited more-or-less all the
way
> around the balloon simultaneously.
>

first problem with that is that the sprayers would have to be brought
up from earth, and they would have to be very complex to be able to
withstand the lack of gravity, and the vacuum of space not to mention
the heat and radiation from the sun. this means heavy, which means
expensive to launch.

if it were internal, the furnaces would be in the open (during
construction only) near the hub. they would be rotating with the
station. they they would be able to seen the heated material though
conduits that were connected with an inner cylinder. from their the
heated material would go to 4 to 8 sprayers, that would be working in
an atmosphere, and under a gravity situation.

another possibility is to line the balloon with a thin layer of
regolith (not sure if this is the correct spelling), then covered
with aluminum powder. a electonic gun is then fired at it, melting
the powder into the regolith, forming a solid surface. several thin
layers of this would create a fairly strong surface upon to work. at
this point there are many known and proven ways of putting down a
solid floor.

would you mind if i suggested an alternative.

At 02:13 PM 5/18/2006, you wrote:
>first problem with that is that the sprayers would have to be brought
>up from earth, and they would have to be very complex to be able to
>withstand the lack of gravity, and the vacuum of space not to mention
>the heat and radiation from the sun. this means heavy, which means
>expensive to launch.

There is no reason to believe the sprayers would be particularly heavy, or
necessarily all that complex. They would need careful design and, I admit,
I don't have any particular design in mind. Perhaps just a solar furnace
to vaporize, some RF to ionize, and electro-magnetic fields to direct the
spray -- or maybe something even simpler.

>if it were internal, the furnaces would be in the open (during
>construction only) near the hub.

If the sprayers are on the inside of the balloon they are, by definition,
not in the open.

>they would be rotating with the
>station.

I don't think the balloon should rotate. The colony should rotate up after
all the easier-to-do-in-0g is done, which is quite a bit.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, Al Globus wrote:

>
> There is no reason to believe the sprayers would be particularly
heavy, or
> necessarily all that complex. They would need careful design and,
I admit,
> I don't have any particular design in mind. Perhaps just a solar
furnace
> to vaporize, some RF to ionize, and electro-magnetic fields to
direct the
> spray -- or maybe something even simpler.
>

its not so much that each one would weigh that much, but in order to
cover a space of nearly 200000 meters in circumference (you did say
250 meters in diameter i believe), you would need literally hundreds
of them. even if they were in a single line (which would mess up
things by making one end much heavier) you would still have to have
many of them to spray on the surface in such a way as to no cause the
balloon to become out of balance. unless each of them has its own
furnace (very unlikely), they would have to be connected to a central
furnace using conduits. these conduits would have to be able to
handle the liquified or vaporized metals without over heating. they
would also have to deal with the inertia, and motion of the metal as
it is pumped to the sprayer. while the sprayers themselves would not
necessarily be heavy, all the support structure (remember in space,
the law is, for every action, there is an equal and opposite
reaction: attempt to break this law and you ll wish it was a cop you
had to deal with), the conduit, the conduit support, and other things
related to it.
>
> If the sprayers are on the inside of the balloon they are, by
definition,
> not in the open.
>
true the sprayers are on the inside, but i said the furnace was on
the outside. the sprayers are on the inside, and connected to it by
conduits.
>
> I don't think the balloon should rotate. The colony should rotate
up after
> all the easier-to-do-in-0g is done, which is quite a bit.
>
its a lot harder than you think to operate in zero g. for every
movement, there has to be a counter movement to stop it. this
movement is equal to the movement to start it. while it would be
easier to handle some things in zero g, mainly large preassembled
complex objects, most things, including moving about are alot easier
to do in low to normal gravity.