How to build this?

If you have ever been in a dome house, the wasted space becomes apparent
near the edges. There the curvature makes it to short for ergonomic sitting
or standing, and most furniture and utitlities that are designed for easy
human use are verticaly constructed and again, can't get all the way to the
edge. However, I think that fluid storage could make use of these areas
quite nicely in a space habitat, while providing shielding (as I recall,
TangoMan, you are quite fond of water shielding). There are probably
numerous other things that can also be fit into this 'wasted' space, such as
electronics, air cylinders, etc... So, in terms of space habitat, I'd have
to say that a cylinder with ten levels makes much more sense than a
cylinder. Here's two important reasons why:

1) less surface area for radiation and micrometeor shielding
2) much more efficient for heat conservation

This last may not be relevant, but I just don't know the dynamics of
equipment heat, plus sun, and how that relates to the inside temperature. At
any rate, it seems obvious that spheres will be the shape of choice for
compact human habitats and ship design.

Val

>Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 15:17:06 -0000
>
> > A ten storey cylindrical building at each end is probably the
> > easiest thing to design and build. The amount of extra sheilding
> > needed relative to a sphere with the same volume is about one
> > third, but a cylinder has more useable internal area than a
> > sphere.
>
>HUH? If you have a sphere with 10 floors and a cylinder with 10
>floors, then where does the *more usable internal area* for a
>cylinder come from?
>
> > Everyone should stop thinking in aerodynamic shapes. Space doesn't
> > need it. Think of what would be easy to build and maintain.
>
>I've been following this thread and I don't recall anyone proposing
>aerodynamic shapes. Can you direct me to the message where someone
>did make such a reference?
>
> > Weight is an important factor, but it's not the first thing that
> > should come to you mind.
>
>Why not? The more massive the spaceship, the more fuel that it will
>have to carry, all else being equal. The fact that they now have to
>carry more fuel to propell the ship also means that they have to
>carry more fuel to carry that extra fuel, see rocket equation.
>
>TangoMan
>

FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar get it now!