You are not logged in.
One option that I have sometimes wondered about is to build the ship in a way that makes it easy to seperate things like the engines and control systems. We could pack these into a relatively compact module for reentry and recovery. The tankage and fuselage can then be cannibalised in orbit. Having paid to blast these things into orbit, it is questionable to then waste that invested energy by dumping it in Earth atmosphere.
Doing things in this way means making a lot more rocket vehicles. But this introduces economies of scale that can bring down costs in a different way. Definitely something that will have crossed Elon Musk's mind from time to time.
I will be resuming work on my windmill on Tuesday. I am hoping to have it finished and up and running a week today. Making tools will take a while longer.
When someone fights for your country, they deserve your respect. If they choose to apply for citizenship, military service should be taken into account in reaching a decision. Should it provide an automatic pass? Absolutely not. When you make someone a citizen, you are permanently inviting them and their descendants into the extended family of your nation. That is not a decision to reach lightly. This man committed a serious felony. His military service and injuries should have been taken into account when deciding his sentence. Presumably, they were. But expecting to enter the American extended family having committed attempted murder on American soil would be unreasonable.
The problem with building large and thin masonry domes, is not the strength of the materials, it is stability. Prior to pressurisation, the dome will be subject to external forces from the overburden. If these are too high, they will buckle the dome inwards, even if the crush strength of the dome is never exceeded. The critical external pressure that could result in buckling instability for a sphere or hemisphere, is given by:
Where:
Pcr = critical external pressure for onset of buckling (Pa);
E = Young's Modulus (Pa);
v = Poisson's Ratio;
t = dome wall thickness (m);
R = Dome radius (100m).
For Class A engineering brick, Poisson's Ratio is 0.15 - 0.25. I have taken an average value of 0.2. I could not find a value of Young's Modulus for hard engineering bricks. This site proposes a value of 20GPa for brick generally.
https://www.engineering.com/youngs-modu … the-brick/
We will be putting enough overburden on the dome to impart a 50KPa external pressure. This will be sufficient to counteract internal pressure when the dome is fully pressurised. Prior to pressurisation, during construction, there will be a net inward pressure of 50KPa acting downwards. Maximum effective pressure will be experienced at the dome apex. This is where buckling is most likely to occur.
Solving for the known variables, gives a minimum stable value of t of 14.56cm. The mortar between bricks will also effect youngs modulus of the structure. We are planning to use epoxy resin to glue the bricks together. However, assuming that individual bricks are polished, only a very thin layer (0.1mm) of epoxy need be applied to bond them. So the effect of the mortar in this case will be minimal. With this in mind, for a 200m diameter dome, wall thickness should not be less than 14.56cm. A thickness of 20cm allows for some margin of safety.
Of course, the dome presented here is not a perfect hemisphere. It is parabolic, which allows downward compressive forces to be absorbed with reduced shearing stress within the structure. This reduces the risk of buckling. In addition, Martian regolith is known to possess adhesive properties due to its high iron oxide content. Indeed, compressing regolith fines in a mold would produce a reasonably strong ceramic. This gives reason to expect that any compacted regolith layer would tend to redistribute load around the dome, reducing the downward pressure acting on the apex. These factors tend to suggest that the calculated value of minimum safe thickness is conservative and a 20cm dome thickness will be more than adequate to ensure structural stability.
The ratio of t/R is constant for all values of R with the same materials properties. This means that a dome with 50m radius required a 10cm minimum brick wall thickness. Likewise, a 500m diameter dome would require a minimum wall thickness of 50cm.
The attached image shows a possible plan view of the town built beneath the proposed 200m diameter brick dome on Mars.
The red lines indicate the walls of individual buildings. The black shaded areas are roads, squares and the agora (in the centre). All roads are entirely pedestrian spaces. The two ring roads have a width of 2m for pedestrian traffic. The two straight roads that cross the agora have a minimum width of 3m. The streets widen at intersections. These are natural meeting places and will likely be the location of cafes, with extra seating spilling out onto the street.
The agora is a circular paved area some 50m in diameter at the centre of the town. Most days this will contain overspill outside seating from restaurants and bars. It will also host open air markets, Christmas events, theatre performances and is large enough to accomdate the entire population for town meetings.
All buildings are coloured green. This denotes the presence of roof gardens. Every building will host roof garden space. This will all be connected to form a continuous landscape, with foot bridges connecting all blocks above street level. This is important, because the street level of the town is extremely confined, with almost all of space taken up by buildings. The roof garden landscape provides an open green space that is open to all by ascending a spiral staircase from the street or from within buildings. These garden spaces will be places for recreation. This limits the stress of living within an otherwise crowded environment.
The buildings at the outer edge of the dome are large structures. They will include such things as sports facilities, gymnasium, schools, cinema, university departments, hotels, government buildings, public bathhouses and overspill accomodation. These will be constructed right up against the edge of the brick dome. The inner districts consist of smaller buildings. These will include terrace houses, as well as shops, bars, cafes and restaurants.
The whole town will be very densely inhabitated, due to the cost of constructing the dome. Houses will be small in footprint, but also tall. Flats may also be located above commercial premisses. How many people could live in this town? The medina in Fez, Morroco is a pedestrian city with a floor area ratio of about 1.5. It's population density is about 550/hectare. Our Martian town will have structures constructed on about 80% of internal land area, to a height of 5 floors. So floor area ratio is about 4. I will therefore conservatively assume about double the population density of the Fez medina. The area under the dome is 3.14 hectares, suggesting a population limit of some 3,500 people. The inclusion of underground spaces in addition to the roof garden, allows these people to spread out some more. It might be tolerable for some people to live in underground apartments, if they can climb a set of stairs into the town when they need open space.
Teraforming would provide a solution here. If Mars is warmer and has an active hydrosphere, then the fines that are currently being blown about would end up as clay minerals in sediments. If Mars had a large sea anywhere on its surface, it would tend to eat up this dust, because dust could enter the sea, but would have no way of leaving once it did. It would tend to settle as mud at the bottom. But the atmosphere is too thin at present and temperatures too cold to allow a sea to form anywhere on Mars.
Basalt fiber has a tensile strength ranging from 2.8 to 3.1 GPa. This beats most maraging steels, for a material with only about 1/3rd the density! For larger castings, the strength is a lot less. This is likely because cooling introduces stress fractures into the material, which is quite brittle. Tensile stress must be kept sufficiently low to ensure that any stress fractures remain smaller than critical crack length. This allowable stress will be much lower than the UTS of the material. Still, the compressive strength of 300-500MPa is impressive.
I wonder if we could make rails out of this stuff? They would need a steel strip upper surface to interface with the wheels. But the compressive strength is plenty for a railway line. Food for thought. If this material cannot cope with thermal transients, then that would be its undoing on Mars. High manganese steel should retain ductility even at Martian nighttime temperatures. But the energy cost is much higher. Steel making on Mars will be much easier if we find fossil methane or hydrogen in traps beneath its surface. There are hints that that may be the case. But the presence of large deposits is speculative at this point,
If the bricks are quite smooth, then a thin layer of epoxy glue could be used to bond them. If we assume a brick height of 10cm and a 1mm layer of epoxy glue, then we would need about 50 cubic metres for the whole dome. The glue would weigh about 50 tonnes. There are three potential challenges that I can see:
(1) As the dome rises, the work surface curves inwards. Beyond about 1/3rd of the way up, each new layer of bricks would need to be held in place whilst the glue sets.
(2) Mars is cold compared to most environments on Earth. Glue would be extremely stiff at temperatures <0°C. Setting time would be long, if indeed it sets at all. We may need to apply resistance heaters to keep the bricks and glue warm while the glue sets.
(3) Mars has an atmosphere with non-negligible pressure, which is a strong advantages over the moon. However, epoxy monomers are quite volatile. Will evaporation negatively impact the glue?
Assuming we can solve these problems, epoxy glue looks like the best approach. We could potentially produce a fine paste of epoxy glue and martian fines as a cement. That way, we can reduce the required mass of glue still further.
The image below shows how I think we will build brick domes on Mars.
The inner black lining is a parabolic dome that would be constructed from Class A engineering bricks. Regolith covers the dome and forms a spiral Ziggurat. This allows a spiral road to wind around the structure until it reaches the top.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziggurat
The stepped structure shown in my sketch is exagerated. Likely, the retaining wall behind the road will be no more than 1m high, so each spiral layer as shown in the drawing would be 1m high. This avoids any significant load concentrations that could result in buckling instability. The road will wrap around the structure over 100 times before reaching the top. We would build the berm incrementally around the parabolic dome as it is assembled towards its apex. This allows assembly robots easy access to the work surface by running up the spiral road. It also avoids the need for formwork inside the dome, as robots can climb up the regolith berm to get to the work surface. With each new metre added to the dome, regolith would be piled around it and the spiral road will be extended once around the structure. In this way, the only materials needed are brick, stone, graded regolith and a binding cement for the bricks.
The dome shown here has a diameter of 200m (650'). This gives an internal land area of 3.14 hectares. The dome itself can be quite thin, as it is really acting as a retaining wall to prevent compacted regolith from crumbling inward. We would need a minimum of 400,000 tonnes of graded regolith to build the berm. This is the amount needed to balance an internal pressure of 50KPa under Martian gravity over an area of 3.14 hectares. Moving and compacting this much regolith is no small task. If we processed 1100 tonnes per day, it would take about 1 year to build the structure. Assuming a dome thickness of 7.5cm (standard width engineering brick) we would need ~15,000 tonnes of engineering bricks. That is 41 tonnes per day × 1 year. That is about 12 cubic metres of bricks per day. I think we could do that in a modest sized brick oven.
I anticipate that the dome would contain an extremely dense urban district. This will consist of very narrow pedestrian streets lined with terrace houses and shops. Rather like the Fez medina. To get the most use out of our dome, I anticipate that the internal town will be built on three levels. The lowest level will consist of a network of subsurface tunnels and chambers. This would contain functional infrastructure (water delivery, sewage removal and treatment, electric power delivery), as well as small scale industry, inventory storage and any other functions that don't need to take place in the buildings above. Next will be town itself, a dense network of terrace buildings designed to resemble a mediaeval town. These would be limited to 5 floors high, to preserve the human scale of the city. Finally, the top level will be the flat roofs of the buildings, which will be landscaped as a continuoys greenspace, with footbridges running over streets.
How many people would live in the dome?
It may turn out that substantial water will eventually be found beneath the surface of the moon. Go just 1m down and temperature is a stable -20°C even at the equator. So any water at this depth will not be mobile. Any that migrates through the interlocking maze of mineral grains, will be trapped at this depth. Any small cracks and crevices in the surface may also serve as cold traps.
Regarding the reduction of Mars iron oxide using hydrogen. This would be a good way of producing extremely strong bricks. Graded fine regolith is richer in iron oxide than most Earth soils. Graded fines could be compressed into a mold producing a green brick. The green brick is then baked in an oven at temperatures of 1000°C for a period of several hours in a hydrogen atmosphere. The iron oxide woukd be steadily reduced by the H2. This results in long chain oxide molecules with partial oxidation states. This polymerised iron oxide makes the brick stronger than steel (in compression).
TH, see images below.

In this example, cables support a steel frame ceiling. The frame is covered first with a layer of coarse rocks and then a layer of compacted regolith fines. Finally, bulk regolith is heaped ontop to a depth of about 5m. The weight of the regolith and frame is transfered to the cables prior to pressurisation. The cables transfer load to the cast basalt ring on top of the stone retaining wall. Circumferential compressive forces balance the tensile forces in thebasalt fibre cables.
Once pressurised, the internal pressure would largely cancel out the downward weight of the frame and regolith overburden. At this point, tensile stresses in the cables and shearing stresses in the frame, are largely cancelled out. This removes any longterm fatigue problems.
The LED screen (or blue transluscent sheet?) would hang from the underside of the steel frame. This would presumably be a lightweight structure.
I'm not quite sure why we would build a roof this way, rather than as an entirely compressive shell structure. Can you think of advantages that a cable supported structure would have over a parabolic compressive shell?
For Calliban re new Suspended Roof topic...
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=11235
Of all our members, it seems to me you may be best qualified to add substance to this new topic.
I am hoping your previous work on cast iron would extend to this structure.
It seems likely you would need stronger material for the cables, and that would require energy, but a city like this is going to happen only if there is sufficient energy available to splurge on metalurgy. Assuming you have enough energy, am i correct in thinking a city scape using suspended roofing with regolith cover for pressure balance and radiation protection would make sense?
The alternative is to dig underground, and it seems to me that unless huge natural cavities are found, it would ** always ** take more energy for excavation than would be required for the suspended roof concept.
(th)
One material that we have examined in the past is cast basalt. This has compressive strength of 300-500MPa. This is about the same as the tensile strength of low alloy steel. From the data in the attached article, I estimate that between 1.5-2MJ of heat are needed to transform 1kg basalt from a room temperature solid to a castable liquid. Basalt has density 3t/m3, whereas low alloy steel is 7.8t/m3.
http://www.rmag.soil.msu.ru/articles/478.pdf
Low alloy steel has an energy cost of about 30MJ/kg if produced from ore rather than recycled metal. On Mars, it will all be produced from ore for a long time to come. This means that 1 cubic metre of cast basalt has about 2.5% of the energy cost of the equivelant volume of steel. We also need a lot less equipment to produce cast basalt. An electrically heated furnace and a set of moulds to cast the ceramic members.
Cast basalt tiles could then be glued together using a thin film of epoxy resin to produce a tibrel vaulted roof. If the tiles are polished after casting, then the epoxy film could be as thin as 0.1mm thick. The vault would then be covered in a thick berm of compressed graded regolith.
This tool allows individually designed buildings to be uploaded and rendered into an AI generated cityscape. Very impressive.
https://www.d5render.com/
Using tools like this, we could design a Martian city right here on Earth and have all of the design elements worked out.
Addressing the point made by SpaceNut. Ultimately, it is transportation of people, goods and wastes, that limits the geographical size of a city. I found this article to be enlightening.
https://www.d5render.com/posts/walkable … ples-guide
For an entirely pedestrian city to be practical, it must be possible to walk from any one part to any other part in a reasonable amount of time. This is one of the reasons why preindustrial cities tend to be quite small and compact. Ancient Rome is a notable exception. But in general, inhabitants must be able to access all of the amenities of the city in easy walking distance of where they live. In practice, this tends to result in pedestrian urban areas being very built up, with narrow streets and compact terrace houses. Amsterdam, Venice and the North African medina towns demonstrate this.
The grand medina in Fez, houses some 150,000 people, along with thousands of commercial businesses and small manufacturers, all on just 1 square mile of land. Population density is 550 people per hectare, which amounts to some 18 square metres per person. What makes this even more incredible, is that the mud based buildings are rarely higher than two stories. The arrangement works by making the most efficient use of space. Street space in most cities is actually greater than that devoted to buildings. But pedestrian streets can be as small as 2' wide and it is common for streets not to exceed 3' in width. This is enough for people to pass each other. The houses in Fez are also small, as they were built in more minimalist times. On Mars, we can do better than the medieval builders of Fez. We will be building cities in dry enclosures on a planet with only 2/5 of the gravity. So we can safely build 3-4 storey structures out of rammed soil bricks and mortar bound stone, without needing impractically thick walls of the ground floor. With stronger materials, we can build higher. We can even have streets on multiple levels. That would be impractical with cars, but can work in a pedestrian city. The low gravity of Mars allows us to free up space for street restaurants, cafes and small gardens, whilst maintaining very high population density.
Another option occured to me when walking around the Dutch cities. On Earth, areas with high rainfall need a sloped roof, to prevent the weight of water from overburdening roof supports. On Mars, we will be building our cities under frames covered with rock and soil. Essentially, artificial caves. There will be no precipitation unless we deliberately introduce it. Gravity is only 2/5 that of Earth. It should be possible to build all structures with flat roof space. This roof space can be developed as a greenspace, provided that soil is not too thick and heavy. This would provide an open enironment that is above the cramped streets below. In this way, we can effectively stack a garden on top of our city. A place where people can walk and enjoy greenery. The plants will contribute to cleaning and freshening the air. This would be impractically heavy on Earth. But the lower gravity of Mars could allow it.
The New Urbanism movement was founded in the United States in the 1990s, by people who had grown tired of the car-centric lifestyle that exists everywhere in America. The arrival of the car utterly ruined American cities. They became places that everyone wanted to get away from. Europe was spared the worst of this vandalism by a mixture of historical asset inertia and lack of space to build very spread out cities.
http://www.newurbanism.org/newurbanism.html
Whoever wrote the New Urbanism website dragged a lot of their personal politics into it, which I think is a shame. None the less, the value of compact, carfree towns and cities, is amply demonstrated by the site.
Another excellent web resource is Carfree Cities by Crawford.
https://www.carfree.com/fes/index.html
Crawford develops a city architecture that achieves pedestrianisation within districts, with rail travel working between districts. In the referenced section, he talks about the grand medina in Fes. This is the largest intact medieval city in North Africa. It is entirely carfree. The streets are too narrow to allow even bycycles. Approximately 150,000 people live in the medina, which has an area of 300 hectares, or only slightly over one square mile in area. That is about 20 square metres land area per inhabitant. This is very dense and is made to feel even more cramped by the low rise buildings of the medina.
I noticed a lot of houses did have cellars in Amsterdam. Many of these had steps descending into them from street level and most appeared to me to have been converted into flats. They appeared to be beneath the canal water level and presumably beneath the ground water level, which is never far beneath the surface in Holland. When originally built, these cellars would have been used for storage. Being beneath the water table would not necessarily have resulted in frequent catastrophic flooding, provided that evaporation balances the rate of seepage through the walls. But it would have made these cellars rather damp places, vulnerable to fungal infestation. To be habitable or suitable for storage of perishable items, tanking would be required, in addition to forced ventilation. That can get expensive, as even small leaks can result in high humidity that fungus will take advantage of.
My own cellar in the UK has exactly this problem. My house is 200 years old and was once a bakery. Flour was stored in the damp cellar, hanging from iron hooks in the floor joists above. I can only conclude that this arrangement was tolerable because flour was used quickly upon receipt, without giving it chance to rot. I have made some improvements over the years. A concrete floor. I have repointed some of the original lime mortar within the granite walls with less permeable cement. But damp is still a problem.
Back in the UK now. I took this batch of pictures in Hoorn in North-Holland.























































Some more pics of Amsterdam.







































Mars is something of a paradox. In theory, it has more land than any nation on Earth. Indeed, it has as much land as the entirety of Earth. In the early years of colonisation, land will be free. For a long time to come, it will be cheap. But aside from mining rights, it is also worthless. Nothing can grow in the dry, toxic soil surrounded by vacuum. And a house built on the surface of Mars would be uninhabitable as it would contain no air. We could build cities as a network of pressurised buildings, each surrounded by vacuum. But that would mean donning spacesuits to move between buildings or having pressurised passageways, which will be single point failures. Humans also seem to prefer open air environments that provide a sense of space. I think it most likely that city districts will be built as single pressurised enclosures, with non-pressurised buildings within. District enclosures will be connected by underground, pressurised passageways. This allows the city to grow over time, by adding more modular districts.
Land within the enclosure will be expensive. This is inevitable, as we must construct a pressurised enclosure around it. This could be a tensile structure, like a dome. Or it could be a gravity pressure vessel, using the weight of an overbearing mass of soil to counterbalance internal pressure. But either way, habitable space on Mars requires no small amount of engineering. When living space is expensive, the architecture should make the most efficient use of it possible. For small spaces, no more than a few hundred metres across, we don't need cars or even bycycles to move people and goods within an urban district. All transportation within will be by foot, with perhaps handcarts used to transport heavier and bulky goods over the short distances within districts. This is an opportunity as much as a challenge.
Cities were built in this way for thousands of years before the car ruined the urban landscape with cancerous urban sprawl. In the modern city, far more land is devoted to cars than to buildings. This has expanded the footprint of cities, to the point where they are so large that they are inaccessible to a man on foot. This has led to a form of cancer. The more unpleasant and sprawled the urban environment became, the more people desired to escape it and the more they needed motorised transportation to navigate it. In the race to achieve infinite personal mobility, mankind built urban environments that are a grim dystopia that everyone is desperate to escape from. This created a positive feedback that could only be exhausted by depletion of resources. The US took this further than any other nation, because its resources and land area provided no natural breaks. The more unpleasant the environment became, the more the demand for transportation grew, as people desired to live outside of it, but still needed the income it provided. At no point were the people involved prepared or able to realuse that they were the problem.
The cities of the Netherlands are unique in the fact that there was insufficient land to allow this cancer to spread very far. Dutch cities have preserved their preindustrial pedestrian character. The bycycle has improved mobility within the limited space available, but cities lacked the space for cancerous urban sprawl in the way that American cities did. So Dutch cities focussed on improving the limited environments that they had. The UK is part way between the Netherlands and the US in terms of the amount of land available. As a result, the cancer of urban sprawl started, but never went as far as it was able to in the US. With far fewer resources and far less land, the Netherlands has succeeded in building livable urban environments that Britain can only aspire to and Americans can only dream of. This makes Dutch cities a perfect case study for the development of Martian cities, where habitable land will similarly be constrained. Martian cities will be compact and pedestrian. I raise this thread in an attempt to explore how Martian cities will develop within the constraints imposed by the Martian environment.
Utrecht (5)






Utrecht (4)








Utrecht (3)








Utrecht (2)








Some pictures from Utrecht.








It may have been written in Dutch, I don't. Whilst the IR telescopes would be valuable for Earth defence, they are equally valuable for resource prospecting. IR emission spectra should also tell us a lot about the minerology of each asteroid. Starship has already reached a sufficient level of technological development to do this right now, if it were used in expendible mode. Reusability is proving to be difficult because of the sheer trauma of atmospheric entry on the ship. But in expendible mode, the ship would appear to be fully operational.
I like the idea of kinetic impactors. At a 30km/s relative velocity, an impactor will carry 500MJ/kg of specific energy. That is about 100x of the explosive energy density of TNT. It may be that we don't need nukes to deflect asteroids, just a lump of iron hitting them at high relative velocity. But provided there is sufficient time to impact, we could make the most dangerous asteroids our first priority for mining. By the time the impact date arrives, the asteroid would have been processed into solar power satellites, space stations and propellant.