New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#1 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Brick on Mars » Today 19:42:38
Shocking breakthrough makes colonizing Mars more realistic
For decades, the idea of people living on Mars has felt like a distant fantasy, limited by the brutal cost of hauling everything from Earth and the difficulty of building safe shelters on a hostile world. That picture is starting to shift as engineers quietly solve the hardest part of the problem: how to construct real infrastructure using Martian soil itself. A cluster of new techniques for making bricks, concrete and even self-assembling structures from local material is turning the dream of a permanent foothold on the Red Planet into a practical engineering challenge rather than a science fiction plot.
The new Martian brick that changes the equation
The most striking development is a method that lets future settlers turn raw Martian dust into solid building blocks without importing heavy equipment or binders from Earth. NASA scientists have announced a way to create robust bricks on Mars using only local dust, minerals and a small amount of human sweat, effectively turning the grit under an astronaut’s boots into structural material. In reports shared in Jul, the agency described how this process could produce dense, durable bricks that lock together into walls and radiation shields, cutting out the need to ship conventional construction materials across interplanetary space.What makes this so disruptive is not just the chemistry, but the logistics. Launching one kilogram of cargo from Earth is already expensive, and a settlement would need thousands of tons of material for habitats, storage and shielding. By relying on Martian dust and minerals, the NASA approach slashes that mass requirement and lets crews scale up construction as they go, brick by brick, instead of waiting for resupply. The technique, detailed in a Facebook group post on NASA scientists, frames human presence not as a fragile outpost, but as a growing worksite where the planet itself becomes the raw stock for expansion.
From improvised shelters to full Martian communities
Once you can make a single brick, the next question is whether you can build entire neighborhoods. Follow up work has shown that scientists have successfully created bricks strong enough to support not just small test structures, but the foundations of full-scale habitats. Using similar principles that combine Martian dust with minimal additives, researchers have demonstrated blocks that could be stacked into domes, tunnels and multiroom shelters capable of housing crews for months at a time. The same Jul reporting on NASA’s work has been echoed in other technical communities, where engineers argue that these bricks could underpin entire communities on Mars rather than just emergency bunkers.That shift in ambition matters because it changes how mission planners think about timelines. Instead of shipping prefabricated modules for every new crew, agencies could send a compact starter kit of tools and rely on local brick production to expand living space, storage and even agricultural enclosures. The idea that settlers might one day walk through streets lined with structures made from Martian dust is no longer a poetic metaphor, but a scenario grounded in lab-tested materials. One widely shared discussion of how scientists have successfully created bricks robust enough for entire communities captures how quickly the field has moved from proof of concept to city-scale thinking.
Self-building tech and shape-optimized structures
Material is only half the story. The other half is how to assemble it in a place where human labor is scarce, dangerous and expensive. In June, a study from Texas A&M University, working with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, introduced a self-building technology that could let habitats on Mars assemble themselves from modular components. The concept uses robotic systems and smart joints that lock together autonomously, guided by algorithms that account for Martian gravity and the properties of regolith, which consists of dust, sand and rocks. Instead of astronauts spending weeks in bulky suits stacking bricks, swarms of machines could raise walls and roofs while crews focus on science and survival.At the same time, structural engineers are rethinking what Martian buildings should look like in the first place. Rather than copying Earth-style boxes, they are designing shape optimized structures that use arches, shells and curved forms to handle pressure differences and radiation with far less material. One detailed analysis shows that such structures can remarkably reduce the energy and material required for construction, while also eliminating the need for large imports from Earth. The study argues that these optimized geometries, when combined with in situ concrete and regolith-based bricks, can lead to sustainable colonization on Mars by aligning architecture with the physics of the environment. The case for these designs is laid out in research that notes how Such structures reduce both energy and imported mass, a crucial advantage when every kilogram counts.
When I put these threads together, the picture that emerges is of a construction ecosystem that is both automated and highly efficient. Self-building systems from Texas and the University of Nebraska, Lincoln can handle the assembly, while shape optimized shells minimize the amount of Martian material that needs to be processed in the first place. That combination does not just make habitats cheaper, it makes them faster to deploy, which is vital in the narrow windows when launch trajectories and Martian seasons line up in favor of new arrivals.
Concrete, 3D printing and the rise of in situ manufacturing
Bricks and shells are powerful tools, but long term settlements will also need heavy duty infrastructure: landing pads, radiation bunkers, pressure locks and industrial floors. Here, researchers are turning Martian soil into a kind of waterless cement known as AstroCrete. Studies of future Mars settlements, often described as the Red Planet’s first towns, point out that All the key ingredients for this material, including regolith, certain salts and even biological components, will be available in relative abundance in Martian environments. AstroCrete made from Martian regolith and human byproducts behaves like a tough concrete that can be cast into slabs and beams without relying on scarce water, which is too valuable to waste on construction. One technical overview notes that All of these components can be sourced locally, making AstroCrete a cornerstone of Martian civil engineering.Alongside concrete, 3D printing is emerging as the workhorse for turning raw regolith into precise parts. Techniques originally developed for products as mundane as an airless basketball are being adapted to extraterrestrial construction. One analysis of advanced additive manufacturing notes that this approach not only reduces the need for carrying heavy payloads from Earth, but also offers the potential for rapid prototyping and adaptability to the unique Martian environment. The same logic that lets engineers print a complex lattice for a sports ball can be applied to printing pressure vessels, support trusses and custom connectors on Mars, all tuned to local gravity and temperature swings. The broader promise of this method is captured in work showing how 3D printing can cut launch mass from Earth while boosting flexibility on site, a point underscored in coverage of how printing directly from regolith reduces the need to ship bulky components from Earth.
A broader blueprint for sustainable colonization
Behind these individual breakthroughs sits a larger strategic shift in how space agencies and researchers think about Mars. Instead of treating each mission as a one-off expedition, planners are sketching a comprehensive blueprint for colonization that assumes permanent, growing infrastructure. A recent synthesis of this thinking argues that Technological evolution is central to making Mars habitable in a sustainable way. It highlights Key advancements in propulsion, in situ resource utilization, closed-loop life support systems and advanced robotics as the pillars of a long term presence. In that framework, construction technologies like regolith bricks, AstroCrete and self-building habitats are not side projects, but core enablers of a settlement that can expand without constant resupply. The same work on Technological evolution on Mars makes clear that construction, life support and robotics must advance together if colonization is to move beyond flags and footprints.Self-building systems, shape optimized structures and in situ materials are already being woven into that broader roadmap. In June, the work from Texas and the University of Nebraska, Lincoln on self-assembling habitats was framed explicitly as a bridge from science fiction to operational reality, showing how regolith-based modules could be deployed in advance of human crews. Combined with NASA’s Jul breakthroughs on Martian bricks and the growing body of research on sustainable concrete, these developments suggest that the hardest part of colonizing Mars may no longer be the rockets, but the patience to test and refine the tools that will turn dust into cities. As I look across the emerging blueprint, the shocking part is not that colonization is possible, but that the practical pieces are arriving faster than the public conversation has caught up, quietly making a permanent human presence on Mars feel less like a fantasy and more like an engineering deadline.
#2 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Pure Fission Reactor Announcements/News » Today 19:36:14
Scientists discovered a nuclear island that flies in the face of traditional chemistry
Here’s what you’ll learn when you read this study:
While scientists have a pretty good handle on how protons and neutrons form stable nuclei, there are exceptions to those well-established rules.
Known as “Islands of Inversion,” these areas are regions where spherical shapes collapse and deformed objects reign, and typically, they’re found in neutron-rich isotopes.
A new study found what it calls an “Isospin-Symmetric Island of Inversion” in a stable region on the proton-rich side of the atomic stability line, offering new understanding regarding how atoms form.
In 1911, New Zealand physicist Ernest Rutherford theorized that atoms contained a nucleus, and in the ensuing century, scientists have learned a lot about the ins and outs of that nucleus while filling out the periodic table with 118 atomic elements.It turns out atomic nuclei follow some simple rules. For example, when it comes to light nuclei (a.k.a. elements with smaller numbers on the periodic table), having the same number of neutrons and protons increases stability and forms what is known as the N=Z line (“N” being neutrons and “Z” being protons). However, as those numbers grow, the repulsive electromagnetic forces in protons require the presence of an increasing number of neutrons for stability (if there aren’t enough neutrons, the protons will repel each other and push the nucleus apart), resulting in a deviation from this line.
That said, over the years, scientists have also noticed a few behavioral quirks known as “islands of inversion,” where the usual rules of nuclear structure stop working. In other words, “magic numbers”—the counts of protons and neutrons that form stable nuclei—disappear, giving way to unusually strong deformations (how much the shape of the nucleus varies from spherical).
Most of these “islands” occur in exotic isotopes like beryllium-12, magnesium-32, and chromium-64, which are all pretty distant from ‘normal’ nuclei found in nature and are on the neutron-rich side of the stability line. For instance, the most common isotope of chromium is chromium-52, which contains 24 protons and 28 neutrons. Chromium-64, on the other hand, contains 24 protons and a whopping 40 neutrons.
But in a new international study, scientists discovered a remarkably proton-rich island of inversion (with symmetrical proton and neutron excitations) by examining two isotopes of molybdenum: Mo-84 (Z=N=42) and Mo-86 (Z=42, Z=44). They found that the difference of just two neutrons caused Mo-84 to experience what’s called “particle-hole excitation,” where nucleons jump to higher-energy orbitals and leave vacancies in their wake.
Because this behavior occurs in a stable region, where the number of protons approximately equals the number of neutrons, this discovery challenges where certain “islands of inversion” may appear while providing a new look into how nuclei bind together. The results of the study were published in the journal Nature Communications.
“While this phenomenon has been so far studied in very neutron-rich nuclei, its manifestation in nuclei residing on the proton-rich side remains to be explored in detail due to the experimental difficulty of producing medium-heavy-mass N ~ Z nuclei,” the authors wrote. “The two isotopes [reveal] a profound change in their structure and affords deeper insight into the evolution of the nuclear structure at the proton-rich side of the stability line.”
This graph shows the N=Z line as well as the stability link below. The green areas represent other islands on inversion on the neutron-rich side of the stability line where as the purple ellipsoid represents the isospin-symetric island of inversion featured in this study
Almost as complicated as the discovery itself are the methods that the scientists used to make it. First, the team bombarded a beryllium target with accelerated Mo-92 ions, and separated the desired fragments out after the collisions. When resulting Mo-86 atoms struck a second target, some were excited into Mo-84, emitting gamma rays in the process. Those gamma rays were then measured by the GRETINA gamma-ray spectrometer and the TRIPLEX (Triple Plunger for Exotic beams) instrument, both of which can record extremely short atomic lifetimes. The resulting data allowed scientists to discern nuclear deformation.
This new “Isospin-Symmetric Island of Inversion” shows that while we’ve made a lot of progress since Rutherford’s experiments in the early 20th century, there are still many nuclear mysteries out there waiting to be solved.
#3 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Starship repurposed to make or build what we need » Today 19:03:53
Here is another option to build with.
A SpaceX Starship could potentially carry several Cygnus modules, as Starship's massive 100-150 ton payload capacity far exceeds the ~5 ton capacity of the largest Cygnus XL module, allowing it to transport multiple Cygnus units, perhaps two or more, depending on configuration and launch needs, although Starship's use for Cygnus transport isn't its primary role.
Cygnus Cargo Module Capacities (Approximate):
Standard: ~2,750 kg (6,000 lbs) / 18 m³.
Enhanced: ~3,750 kg (8,200 lbs) / 27 m³.
Cygnus XL (Newer): ~5,000 kg (11,000 lbs) / 36 m³.
Starship Payload Comparison:
SpaceX Starship aims for 100-150 tonnes to Low Earth Orbit (LEO).
How Many Could Fit?
Given Starship's capacity is 100,000 kg to 150,000 kg, it could theoretically carry many Cygnus modules, perhaps:
20+ Standard Cygnus modules.
10+ Enhanced Cygnus modules.Around 10 Cygnus XL modules, with significant room for other cargo or even entire Cygnus spacecraft.
While Starship could carry many, missions usually focus on one larger cargo delivery, like a single Cygnus, or potentially larger components for new space stations, rather than multiple resupply vehicles for the ISS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_(spacecraft)
They can also be filled with cargo that we need to double up what it is doing for a mars mission support.
Of course the units would be modified for use on mars to perform making habitats on early on missions.
Make it so that one can join them end to end with additional ports on some to build them together.
Much like the ISS modules these are already capable of being used for mars.
ISS modules have varied specifications, but generally, pressurized modules are roughly 4-13m long, 4-4.5m in diameter, with volumes around 75-106 m³, masses from ~14,000-20,000 kg (e.g., Destiny, Columbus, Zvezda), while trusses (like S3/4) are much longer (73m) and used for power/structure. Key specs include dimensions, mass, pressurized volume, power (100+ kW), crew capacity, and internal systems for life support (ECLSS), data, and experiments, with specialized modules like the Cupola for observation.
Key Examples & Specs
Destiny (US Lab): ~8.5m long, 4.27m diameter, ~14,500 kg, 106 m³ volume.
Columbus (ESA Lab): ~6.9m long, 4.5m diameter, ~19,300 kg (with payload), 75 m³ internal volume.
Zvezda (Russian Service Module): ~13.1m long, 4.15m diameter, ~19,050 kg, vital for life support.
Harmony (Node 2): Connects modules, 6.1m long, 4.2m diameter, ~13,600 kg, with CBMs for connections.
Cupola: A 1.5m tall, 2.95m diameter observation module with 7 windows.
Trusses (e.g., S3/4): Very long (73m), for solar arrays and radiators.
General Specifications
Overall Size: Over 74m of module length, 108m truss length.
Mass: ~420,000 kg (410 metric tons).
Power: Over 100 kW, increasing with new arrays.
Volume: ~1,000+ m³ pressurized volume.
Crew: Typically 7 astronauts.
Internal Systems & Features
Life Support (ECLSS): Recycles water, generates oxygen (e.g., in Tranquility).
Payload Racks: Standardized racks (ISPRs) for science (e.g., Columbus).
Robotics: Canadarm2 operates from the Harmony module.
Thermal Control: MLI blankets, active cooling
#4 Re: Meta New Mars » Housekeeping » Today 17:10:40
The re-purposing topic is more about what can be done to create from what it leaves behind and less about what gets made as those are separate fishbone topics that can be developed separately.
The topic has kbd512's doughnut shape that should be a separate discussion for the remaining difficulties to construct.
The next post has 3 more quick structures of equally different difficulties.
#5 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Starship repurposed to make or build what we need » Today 16:07:53
I also have 3 other shapes that can be built from this same source of materials that can be made early on from empty cargo starships.
laying the structure on the ground we can make 4 starship shells into <===+===> where the < is the nose >
|
or you can do shape <----+----->
|
or 2 ship side by side
<-----+------>
<-----+------>
#6 Re: Meta New Mars » Housekeeping » Today 16:05:56
tahanson43206 I think that I captured all of your words to create a new topic with for the construction in the crater plan for the above image.
Become the champion for you thoughts to an end Please.
If you are planning use the dome images to show how you might build it.
I will delete this information once you create it.
My interest is inspired by Calliban's dome idea, which (as you must know) is about the size of the New Orleans Superdome.
Calliban's dome is about the size of the New Orleans Superdome. The Superdome is set up to handle a crowd of 73,000 people.
Calliban's dome will support a (nominal) population of 1000 residents and guests.
The major difference is that the Superdome is able to exchange air with the outside, and human waste with outside services.
Calliban's dome will need to handle human and animal waste immediately and without error for years on end.
I think that pyrolysis may be the best solution, but RobertDyck has suggested alternative methods, and there may be others to consider.
It turns out the Superbowl is 208 meters in diameter.
The Caesars Superdome vs. Your Mars Dome
Since your Mars dome is modeled after the Superdome’s dimensions, here is the "spec sheet" for the Earth-bound version to help your team with the comparison:
Feature Caesars Superdome (Earth) Mars Dome Consideration
Diameter 680 feet (207 meters) Similar
Height 273 feet (83 meters) Similar
Material 20,000 tons of structural steel In-situ Martian materials (Regolith/Basalt)
Function Entertainment / Sports Total Life Support
Atmosphere 125 million cubic feet of air Pressurized, recycled O2/N2
Climate Control 9,000 tons of A/C Radiation shielding & thermal regulation
https://newmars.com/phpBB3/download/file.php?id=134
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=8833
The "Amsterdam" Crater Dome Concept[
In case you miss the update, we discovered yesterday that the American Superdome at New Orleans is a good match for Calliban's concept. The dome is the same diameter as Calliban's design (plus 7 meters) and a bit less tall (83 meters vs 120).
As a reminder... the New Orleans Superdome turns out to be an existing model for your dome. The diameter is 207 meters (I don't know what was measured) and the height is 83 meters (short of your 120), but again, I don't know what was measured. Despite the uncertainty, it appears to me this existing working dome is surely a good model for your concept.
For SpaceNut .... it turns out that the New Orleans Superdome is a near perfect model for Calliban's dome.
If you ask google to show you images of the New Orleans Superdome it will come back with a wealth of images and videos and many citations about the building.
If you ask for architecture of the New Orleans Superdome it will provide more targeted information.
It turns out the Superdome is 207 meters in diameter although I don't know if that is the diameter at the base.
The height is given as 83 meters, but I don't know if that is inside outside the dome.
Calliban's dome is given as 200 meters interior diameter at the base, and 120 meters interior elevation to the peak.
It should be possible to learn what the architects had to design to provide all the amenities that are present inside the Superdome.
We don't have to guess. We can discover how much energy is required to heat the interior of the dome, to power the lighting, and to process the air and fluids that are brought in and shipped out.
In other words, the Superdome appears to provide a way for us to convert Calliban's vision into something resembling a project plan for implementation on Mars.
As GW Johnson pointed out in today's Google Meeting, there is a lot more to be done to insure the Mars dome is successful, but having hard ground truth to build upon will help us to convert this from hand waving to documentation.
#7 Re: Life support systems » Power Distribution by pipelines on Mars. » Today 15:26:20
part of this post related to making and using
kbd512 wrote:Seamless steel tubing generally offers superior strength-to-weight, as compared to rebar, so we should consider sending and using a machine to make tubing vs rebar to economize on material consumption required to build pressurized habitation volume. A tube is not stronger than a solid rod with the same external dimensions, but it is stiffer (more resistant to deformation under load) for the same mass, so tubes provide more material to satisfy a given strength and stiffness requirement than solid rods (rebar). So that ductility is not lost when cold soaked in the mildly cryogenic Martian night time temperatures, we will have to forego stronger grades of stainless in favor of austenitic stainless steels. Starships are already made from austenitic stainless steel alloys, so this is not a sourcing problem.
Austenitic steels do not "dramatically strengthen" when exposed to thermal processes used to heat treat (harden / strengthen) steels with different grain structures, such as martensitic steels. This makes them much softer and weaker than hardenable steels at room temperature, but they also do not become excessively brittle when exposed to extreme cold. All steels become much stronger at very cold temperatures, to include austenitic steels, but unlike martensitic steels, for example, austenitic steels do not become so strong and hard as to behave more like a brittle ceramic than a ductile metal like low Carbon steel at room temperature.
In steels, strength and hardness are linked together, meaning you do not get one mechanical property change without the other. You can surface vs through harden the steel, though. The excessive hardness, not the significant increase in tensile strength associated with heat treatment or exposure to cryogenic temperatures, is the problem. The austenitic 304L stainless is nominally a 28ksi Yield Strength material at room temperature, but chill it down to Martian night time temperatures and it becomes more like 100-150ksi. This tensile strength improvement also makes the steel harder, but comes at the cost of ductility and toughness. A hardenable martensitic steel like 300M (typically used in aircraft landing gear) starts out at 200ksi+ Yield Strength at room temperature. Thermal soak 300M to Martian night time temperatures and tensile strength becomes something stupidly high, in the range of 300-500ksi. If improved tensile strength was the only mechanical property change, then nobody would ever use austenitic steels for cryogenic propellant tanks. The problem is that the dramatic increase in tensile strength is accompanied by an equally dramatic increase in hardness that makes 300M behave less like steel and more like a ceramic when subjected to an impact loading. Very hard materials do not easily deform and then spring back into shape. When a steel as hard as 300M already is at room temperature, is accidentally struck by a rock after being cooled to mildly cryogenic temperatures, it will likely fracture or shatter like a ceramic pot.
We see this same behavior exhibited by very hard armor steels and high yield ship building steels at Earth-normal temperatures. When the material is struck after exposure to arctic-like temperatures, it can fracture or shatter, especially near weld lines. Ice breakers use special grades of steel in their hulls that do not become quite as strong and hard when cold soaked. The modified steel grain structure won't be as strong and hard at room temperature as "normal" ship building steels a result, but increased strength and hardness at lower temperatures partially compensates. When that is not enough, thicker hull plating is used when colder service temperatures alone do not imbue the steel hull plating with insufficient tensile strength and hardness to meet the structural requirements for the ship's hull. Ordinarily, ice breakers use thicker hull plating by default to enable them to strike and break-up surface sea ice so that commercial ships fabricated from lower cost Carbon steels can then transit arctic waters without substantial hull reinforcement and using more expensive grades of slightly weaker specialty steels.
On Mars, we have no real choice but to accept cold soaking at night, which means we need austenitic steels for construction. However, we could thermally regulate the steel tubing structure's temperature by filling it with liquid CO2 and using it as part of the colony's habitat thermal regulation radiator system. This is just an example, since the strengthening and hardening of any steel alloy is not a straight line as service temperature decreases. However, if keeping the LCO2 inside the structural tubing at a "balmy" -50F vs -100F, also managed to keep the 304L's yield strength in the 65-75ksi range, then it becomes a "more ideal" structural steel that retains greater ductility. 65ksi is about the same as annealed 4130 chrome-moly tubing used in aircraft construction, so obtaining the associated tensile strength and hardness "bump" over 304L's room temperature mechanical properties would make it very suitable for construction purposes. There's obviously a non-zero risk of a CO2 leak inside the habitat dome from using the structure this way, so other engineering considerations must be taken into account. Still, it's an interesting idea with the potential to reduce material consumption while creating a lighter but stronger structure using what is otherwise a "weak" structural steel. Perhaps it's only a suitable structural reinforcement and material economization concept for greenhouses used to grow food for the colony. This was a "work with what you got" vs "work with what you wished you had" idea, and maybe it won't work at all for any number of technical reasons.
#8 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Glass Domes On Mars : Elon Musk’s Incredible Project » Today 15:23:15
A glass shaped structure that rides on a doughnuts shape might give the above ground garden to walk with in.
#9 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Mars structure heating requirements » Today 15:20:18
Part of this relates to the plumbing created from a starships hull
Seamless steel tubing generally offers superior strength-to-weight, as compared to rebar, so we should consider sending and using a machine to make tubing vs rebar to economize on material consumption required to build pressurized habitation volume. A tube is not stronger than a solid rod with the same external dimensions, but it is stiffer (more resistant to deformation under load) for the same mass, so tubes provide more material to satisfy a given strength and stiffness requirement than solid rods (rebar). So that ductility is not lost when cold soaked in the mildly cryogenic Martian night time temperatures, we will have to forego stronger grades of stainless in favor of austenitic stainless steels. Starships are already made from austenitic stainless steel alloys, so this is not a sourcing problem.
Austenitic steels do not "dramatically strengthen" when exposed to thermal processes used to heat treat (harden / strengthen) steels with different grain structures, such as martensitic steels. This makes them much softer and weaker than hardenable steels at room temperature, but they also do not become excessively brittle when exposed to extreme cold. All steels become much stronger at very cold temperatures, to include austenitic steels, but unlike martensitic steels, for example, austenitic steels do not become so strong and hard as to behave more like a brittle ceramic than a ductile metal like low Carbon steel at room temperature.
In steels, strength and hardness are linked together, meaning you do not get one mechanical property change without the other. You can surface vs through harden the steel, though. The excessive hardness, not the significant increase in tensile strength associated with heat treatment or exposure to cryogenic temperatures, is the problem. The austenitic 304L stainless is nominally a 28ksi Yield Strength material at room temperature, but chill it down to Martian night time temperatures and it becomes more like 100-150ksi. This tensile strength improvement also makes the steel harder, but comes at the cost of ductility and toughness. A hardenable martensitic steel like 300M (typically used in aircraft landing gear) starts out at 200ksi+ Yield Strength at room temperature. Thermal soak 300M to Martian night time temperatures and tensile strength becomes something stupidly high, in the range of 300-500ksi. If improved tensile strength was the only mechanical property change, then nobody would ever use austenitic steels for cryogenic propellant tanks. The problem is that the dramatic increase in tensile strength is accompanied by an equally dramatic increase in hardness that makes 300M behave less like steel and more like a ceramic when subjected to an impact loading. Very hard materials do not easily deform and then spring back into shape. When a steel as hard as 300M already is at room temperature, is accidentally struck by a rock after being cooled to mildly cryogenic temperatures, it will likely fracture or shatter like a ceramic pot.
We see this same behavior exhibited by very hard armor steels and high yield ship building steels at Earth-normal temperatures. When the material is struck after exposure to arctic-like temperatures, it can fracture or shatter, especially near weld lines. Ice breakers use special grades of steel in their hulls that do not become quite as strong and hard when cold soaked. The modified steel grain structure won't be as strong and hard at room temperature as "normal" ship building steels a result, but increased strength and hardness at lower temperatures partially compensates. When that is not enough, thicker hull plating is used when colder service temperatures alone do not imbue the steel hull plating with insufficient tensile strength and hardness to meet the structural requirements for the ship's hull. Ordinarily, ice breakers use thicker hull plating by default to enable them to strike and break-up surface sea ice so that commercial ships fabricated from lower cost Carbon steels can then transit arctic waters without substantial hull reinforcement and using more expensive grades of slightly weaker specialty steels.
On Mars, we have no real choice but to accept cold soaking at night, which means we need austenitic steels for construction. However, we could thermally regulate the steel tubing structure's temperature by filling it with liquid CO2 and using it as part of the colony's habitat thermal regulation radiator system. This is just an example, since the strengthening and hardening of any steel alloy is not a straight line as service temperature decreases. However, if keeping the LCO2 inside the structural tubing at a "balmy" -50F vs -100F, also managed to keep the 304L's yield strength in the 65-75ksi range, then it becomes a "more ideal" structural steel that retains greater ductility. 65ksi is about the same as annealed 4130 chrome-moly tubing used in aircraft construction, so obtaining the associated tensile strength and hardness "bump" over 304L's room temperature mechanical properties would make it very suitable for construction purposes. There's obviously a non-zero risk of a CO2 leak inside the habitat dome from using the structure this way, so other engineering considerations must be taken into account. Still, it's an interesting idea with the potential to reduce material consumption while creating a lighter but stronger structure using what is otherwise a "weak" structural steel. Perhaps it's only a suitable structural reinforcement and material economization concept for greenhouses used to grow food for the colony. This was a "work with what you got" vs "work with what you wished you had" idea, and maybe it won't work at all for any number of technical reasons.
#10 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Starship repurposed to make or build what we need » Today 15:14:13
If we provide 125m^3 of pressurized volume for each family of 4, then we need approximately 10 Super Domes worth of pressurized volume to house a million people. Domes tend to have a lot of unusable space, though. What about a ring?
This sounds just like what a caretaker doughnut design from empty starships would be.
Leave the crewed ship in the center of what is constructed from the ships hull materials.
The proposed project of creating a 9-meter stainless steel doughnut cross-section with a crewed starship in the center, utilizing materials from unused cargo ships, is not technically feasible using current industrial and engineering methods.
Here are the key reasons why this concept is impractical:
Material Limitations:
Steel Type: The steel used in standard cargo ships is not typically high-grade stainless steel suitable for precision aerospace or habitat construction. It is standard structural steel, which has different properties regarding corrosion resistance, strength-to-weight ratio, and material consistency.
Repurposing Difficulty: While steel can be recycled, melting down and reshaping massive cargo ship hulls into a precise, large-scale, high-quality "doughnut" cross-section requires specialized industrial remelting processes (like electroslag remelting for high-grade applications) that are complex and costly, making on-site or large-scale transformation unfeasible.
Material Integrity: The structural integrity of repurposing cut and welded sections of existing cargo ships for such a specific, high-stress application (especially if intended for space or extreme environments) would be difficult to guarantee without extensive and costly engineering.
Engineering and Design Challenges:
Structural Requirements: Designing a 9-meter "doughnut" structure to house a starship would have highly specific operational and stiffness requirements that repurposed, potentially compromised, cargo ship materials cannot easily meet.
Scale and Precision: The precision needed for a 9-meter cross-section that interacts seamlessly with a crewed starship is immense. Achieving this precision by modifying large, existing, non-uniform cargo ship sections is impractical.
Feasibility vs. New Construction: It would be significantly more efficient, reliable, and cost-effective to produce the necessary components using new, purpose-built stainless steel designed for the specific application rather than attempting to salvage and heavily modify existing ship parts.
In summary, the foundational materials and engineering processes required to create such a specific, high-specification structure from generic, used cargo ships make the project technologically unviable.What challenges are
You will need 4 sections of the 60 m tube to achieve a total length of 240 m. The final circle will have an approximate diameter of \(76.4\) m.
Step 1: Calculate material needs First, determine the total length of tubing required. The user's desired circumference is 240 meters. The calculation confirms that exactly 4 of the 60-meter tubes are needed to reach this length. The 9 m diameter of the individual tubes is the cross-sectional diameter, not the circle's final diameter.
Step 2: Join the tubes Join the four 60-meter stainless steel tubes end-to-end to create one continuous 240-meter length. This is typically done by welding the joints, which requires specific techniques for stainless steel.
Step 3: Form the circle The 240-meter length of tube must be mechanically bent or rolled into a circular shape. Given the large scale, specialized industrial equipment for bending large diameter, thick-walled (implied by 9m diameter) steel is necessary.
Step 4: Cut and finish A final, precise cut will be needed to join the two ends of the 240-meter length after it is formed into the circle. For cutting stainless steel tubes, common methods include using a portable band saw or an angle grinder with a cut-off wheel, applying slow speed and cutting oil to manage the material's hardness and heat.
Answer: You will need to use 4 of the 60 m tubes to achieve a total length of 240 m. The final circle made from this length will have a diameter of approximately \(76.4\) m (\(240/\pi \)). The tubes must be joined end-to-end and then formed into the circular shape, requiring precise cuts and welding to secure the final joint
That means the inside diameter is 76.4 - 18 = 54 m diameter
The volume of the doughnut shape is approximately 15268.14 cubic meters.
Make 3 floors similar to a submarine flight decks. Assume that the three are 2.5 meters ceiling to floor for each.
#11 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » Yesterday 18:56:03
For a Mars mission or colony of 200 crew members, mission concepts and analog studies suggest a dedicated medical team of several professionals with diverse specializations, supported by a substantial medical bay designed for high autonomy and comprehensive care.
Medical Team Composition
A crew of 200 would require a significant, multi-disciplinary medical team, as real-time evacuation or Earth-based consultation is not feasible due to communication delays (up to 24 minutes each way). The team would need to handle a wide range of conditions, from primary and preventative care to emergency trauma and surgery.
While specific numbers for a 200-person Mars mission are not finalized in publicly available sources, an internal naval comparison suggests a ratio of approximately one medical staff member for every 8-10 crew members in a large-scale scenario. Extrapolating to 200 people, this would imply a core team of approximately 20-25 medical professionals, including:
Physicians with broad experience in emergency medicine, family medicine, and general surgery.
Nurses and paramedics.
Specialists such as anesthesiologists, radiologists, and potentially dental professionals.
Psychologists/Psychiatrists to manage behavioral health and crew well-being in isolation.
Biomedical engineers/technicians for equipment maintenance and lab analysis.
All general crew members would also receive advanced first-aid training.
Medical Bay ("Sick Bay") Size and Design
The "bay size" is not a fixed dimension but rather a functional space designed to support comprehensive medical operations, from routine check-ups to complex surgeries. The design considerations emphasize autonomy and on-site capability:
Functionality: The facility must support Level IV or V care (advanced life support, basic and potentially advanced surgical care, dental, and diagnostic capabilities).
Space Standards: The medical bay must be designed to accommodate a full range of human sizes (from 1st percentile female to 99th percentile male), ensuring adequate work volume, accessibility, and range of motion for medical procedures.
Key Units: The facility would likely include:
Examination and procedure rooms.
An operating/surgical suite.
Laboratory for on-site analysis.
Dental care unit.
Inpatient/recovery beds.
Storage for medical supplies, pharmaceuticals, and equipment.
Waste management unit for medical waste disposal.
Infrastructure: It requires robust life support interfaces, specialized lighting, infection control mechanisms, privacy considerations, and integrated communication systems for telemedicine support from Earth-based flight surgeons.
Overall, the medical bay would be a significant, modular portion of the habitat, designed for self-sufficiency in a resource-restricted and extreme environment
#12 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » Yesterday 18:55:32
I am sure that lots of different medical and medications will need to be set for at minimal a complete suite of capability to go with the capable personnel that we will task for the well care and medical treatment capabilities, We have an idea of the what to expect from the remote locations as we will need to have the ability to do these things.
Sure we need a list for outfitting but its mostly for quantity and mass.
For a Mars mission with a 20-person crew requiring an autonomous, advanced medical capability including surgery, the medical bay and trauma area would need to be designed to accommodate a fully functional medical team and a patient, likely requiring a clear floor area of at least 250 to 300 square feet (23-28 sq meters). This size is based on terrestrial hospital guidelines for single-patient trauma rooms, adapted for a long-duration space mission's specific needs.
Medical Team Composition
Given the autonomy required for a deep space mission due to communication delays, the crew would likely include at least one or more highly trained medical professionals, potentially a flight surgeon or physician with diverse expertise. The number and skill sets of the medical team would need to support:
First aid and clinical diagnostics.
Dental care.
Trauma and emergency care.
Basic surgical capabilities.
Management of medical equipment and supplies, including potential sterilization units.
The team size would be determined by balancing the need for redundancy in expertise against the overall crew size constraints of the spacecraft.
Medical Bay Size
Trauma/Procedure Area: Terrestrial guidelines suggest a clear floor area of 250 sq ft (23 sq m) for a single-patient trauma room to ensure sufficient space for medical staff (multiple providers, potentially a trauma team), equipment, and patient access (minimum 5 feet clearance around the stretcher). A deep space habitat medical bay concept design from NASA incorporates a specific area for procedures/surgery.
Total Medical Bay: The overall medical bay would need to be larger to include areas for:
Stowage of equipment and pharmaceuticals.
Diagnostic equipment (e.g., X-ray, ultrasound, lab equipment).
Sanitation and waste management specific to medical waste.
Private consultation and record keeping using a dedicated medical computer system.
The specific dimensions would also consider anthropometric constraints (accommodating the 1st percentile female to the 99th percentile male crew population) and the unique requirements of a microgravity or partial-gravity environment, such as patient and equipment restraints
#13 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » Yesterday 18:53:30
Medical and health monitoring systems on Mars missions will need to handle injuries and illnesses without the possibility of return to Earth. Telemedicine setups with AI diagnostics, using wearable sensors for real-time vital tracking, are being developed for this purpose. Bone density loss and muscle atrophy from microgravity transit are other health concerns that can be mitigated by exercise regimens and pharmacological countermeasures like bisphosphonates.
Psychological health is another critical aspect of long-duration space missions. Protocols are being developed to combat isolation in crews confined for over two years, including virtual reality simulations of Earth environments.
Space for patients and staff to make use of carves out square meters for each item and needs specific lighting, Specific OR areas super clean.
Medication security and more to aid in keep crew safe and alive while on mars.
While specific plans for a 20-person Mars mission are conceptual, the recommended staffing ratio, based on research into long-duration spaceflight simulations, is approximately one medical professional per every four crew members. This suggests a 20-person mission would ideally have a five-person medical team, composed of a mix of physicians and paramedics/medical specialists.
Medical Team Composition & Role
The "Space Medical Doctor" (SMD) on a Mars mission would have a multifaceted role, encompassing more than just primary care due to the long duration and communication delays with Earth (up to 40 minutes one way).
Key functions would include:
Flight Surgeon/Primary Care Physician: Responsible for the overall health and well-being of the crew.
Surgeon/Emergency Medicine Physician: Essential for managing acute trauma and surgical needs, as medical evacuation is not an option.
Specialists: Potentially a dentist, psychologist, pharmacist, and laboratory technician, possibly filled by cross-trained team members.
Scientist: The medical officer would also conduct research on the effects of spaceflight on the human body.
Medical Autonomy & Technology
Due to the communication lag, crews will require significant autonomy during medical emergencies. Research and development efforts are focused on providing advanced support systems:
"Just-in-Time" Training: Immersive training using technologies like VR and AR to prepare non-medical crew members to assist in procedures.
Advanced Diagnostics: Development of portable diagnostic tools, such as specialized ultrasound technology for issues like kidney stones.
Biomedical Technologies: Utilizing technologies like biochips for rapid analysis and potentially 3D printing for customized medical equipment, casts, and even basic tissues or drugs.
AI Assistants: NASA and Google are exploring the use of AI medical assistants to aid crews in decision-making and patient care without constant ground support.
Current Research
Analog missions, such as NASA's CHAPEA (Crew Health and Performance Exploration Analog) and The Mars Society's Mars Desert Research Station (MDRS), use small crews (typically 4-6 people) that include a crew medical officer to test these protocols and gather data on the physical and psychological challenges of long-duration isolation
Key functions of the Space Medical Doctor (SMD)
1) Flight Surgeon/Primary Care Physician
2) Dentist
3) Scientist
4) Psychologist
5) Safety Officer
6) Pharmacist
7) Nursing
8) Rehabilitation technician
9) Emergency Medical Technician
10) Laboratory Technician
11) Medical writer and journalist
#14 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Starship repurposed to make or build what we need » Yesterday 16:39:38
I found images of the building of the super dome
Scalable structure that could be made from the cannibalized starships, cut and bend to shape.
#15 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » 2026-01-12 16:00:43
More place holders to build
#16 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » 2026-01-12 16:00:36
Fishbone theory, or the Fishbone Diagram (also known as an Ishikawa Diagram or Cause-and-Effect Diagram), is a visual tool for root cause analysis that maps out potential causes of a problem in a fish-skeleton-like structure, helping teams brainstorm, categorize, and identify underlying issues, not just symptoms, for better problem-solving in quality control and management. The problem is the "head," and major causes branch off the "backbone" as "ribs," with sub-causes extending further, revealing hidden linkages and process bottlenecks for future improvements.
Key Components & Structure
Head (Right): The specific problem or defect being analyzed.
Backbone (Horizontal Line): Connects the head to the causes.
Major Causes (Ribs): Large bones branching off the backbone, representing broad categories (e.g., People, Method, Machine, Material,
Measurement, Environment).
Root Causes (Smaller Bones): Sub-branches extending from the major causes, detailing specific reasons within each category.
How it Works (The Process)
Define the Problem: Clearly state the issue in the "head".
Identify Categories: Determine major areas where causes might originate (e.g., the 6 Ms: Methods, Machines, Materials, Manpower, Measurement, Mother Nature/Environment).
Brainstorm Causes: For each category, list all possible causes, adding them as smaller bones.
Deep Dive: Use techniques like the "5 Whys" on sub-branches to find deeper root causes.
Benefits & Uses
Visualizes complex problems: Makes it easy to see all potential causes at once.
Promotes shared understanding: Helps teams build consensus on a problem.
Focuses on root causes: Moves beyond symptoms to find the source of issues.
Used in many fields: Popular in manufacturing, healthcare, quality management, and product development
Fishbone link to our topics Bookmark
#17 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » 2026-01-12 16:00:31
More place holders to build
#20 Re: Human missions » Why Artemis is “better” than Apollo. » 2026-01-12 10:38:00
NASA just switched on a giant solar engine, and it’s headed for the moon
The Gateway, NASA’s upcoming lunar space station, is one step closer to reality as engineers have successfully powered on its solar electric propulsion system, a spacecraft engine designed to orbit and maneuver around the Moon. This achievement marks a major milestone in NASA’s Artemis program, which aims to establish a sustainable human presence on the lunar surface and prepare for future missions to Mars.
Building The Power And Propulsion Element
At the heart of the Gateway lies the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE), developed under the supervision of NASA’s Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio. Construction and assembly are led by Lanteris Space Systems in Palo Alto, California, where teams have integrated the spacecraft’s main electrical system within protective panels. This ensures the hardware can withstand the harsh environment of deep space.Once fully operational, the PPE will generate up to 60 kilowatts of electricity,enough to supply power for communications, navigation, and orbital adjustments. The engine’s advanced solar electric propulsion allows for continuous, efficient thrust powered by sunlight, offering an innovative alternative to traditional chemical propulsion.
The system’s propulsion capability is built around three 12-kilowatt thrusters developed by L3Harris and four 6-kilowatt BHT-6000 thrusters by Busek. Together, these thrusters provide the necessary maneuverability to maintain the Gateway’s orbit and reposition it as needed for lunar missions. Redwire, another NASA partner, is responsible for the roll-out solar arrays, lightweight, flexible panels that convert sunlight into electrical energy.
This hardware will power not only the Gateway’s core functions but also its visiting spacecraft and future science payloads, forming the energetic backbone of NASA’s next-generation lunar operations.
The Gateway’s Role In NASA’s Artemis Program
The Gateway is a cornerstone of NASA’s Artemis program, which aims to return astronauts to the lunar surface for the first time since Apollo 17. Unlike the International Space Station, the Gateway will not be permanently crewed. Instead, it will serve as a modular outpost, orbiting the Moon in a highly stable near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO).This orbit provides ideal access to both the lunar surface and deep space, making it an essential platform for testing life-support systems, radiation protection, and advanced propulsion technologies. Astronauts visiting the Gateway will conduct scientific experiments, prepare landers for surface missions, and evaluate long-duration spaceflight conditions, all critical for future crewed missions to Mars.
NASA envisions Gateway as an international collaboration, involving key contributions from ESA (European Space Agency), JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency), and CSA (Canadian Space Agency). Each partner will deliver specialized modules, robotics, and technology to create a truly global platform for exploration.
Engineering A Sustainable Future Beyond Earth
NASA’s decision to rely on solar electric propulsion for the Gateway is both a technological and environmental breakthrough. Unlike conventional rockets, which burn large quantities of fuel in short bursts, this system produces continuous, gentle thrust using electricity derived from sunlight. Over time, it can achieve impressive velocities with minimal resource consumption, an essential feature for long-duration missions far from Earth.The Gateway will also act as a proving ground for autonomous operations, as it will often function without a human crew onboard. This autonomy will be vital for deep-space missions where communication delays make real-time control impossible. The spacecraft’s design prioritizes efficiency, durability, and adaptability, ensuring it can operate safely and independently in lunar orbit for years at a time.
Through its partnership with Lanteris, L3Harris, Busek, and Redwire, NASA is cultivating a powerful ecosystem of innovation that bridges public and private sectors. These collaborations are essential for building the infrastructure required for humanity’s next leap: establishing a permanent foothold on another world.
#21 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » 2026-01-12 10:21:05
Nasa has been planning with a crew of 4 electrical needs for a capsule being provided 10Kw from solar panels but for mars the amount of energy is divided for use for just 2 crewmen for all functions to create.
So a key power requirement is divide for all functions and must be greater than the stated so as to have margin for all personel to make use of it.
All designs must be based on personnel count for all designs for that reason.
Experiments at HI-SEAS analog station the 10 kw array saves to batteries that hold 28.5 kw hrs of energy.
A solar array needs to cover 4500 sq ft on mars while the same on earth is just 525 sq ft for a 10 kw needs to be 40 kw on mars.
#22 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » 2026-01-12 10:20:59
Integrated Surface Power Strategy for Mars
NASA's power standards for crewed Mars missions vary significantly by mission phase and scale, ranging from a minimum of ~10 kilowatts (kW) for short surface stays with two crew members to potentially megawatt (MW)-class systems for larger, longer missions with in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) like propellant production, with nuclear power often favored for its reliability, though early missions might use solar/battery systems, with total requirements approaching 160 kWe for some concepts.
Key Power Requirements & Considerations:
Minimum Surface Power: Around 10 kW is considered the baseline for even short (30-day) missions with two crew, covering habitat, life support (ECLSS), and some science/exploration.
ISRU & Larger Crews: Missions involving propellant manufacturing (ISRU) and larger crews (e.g., six people) can push power needs to 40-160 kW or more for activities like producing oxygen and fuel.
Transit/Propulsion: Missions using nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) could require very high power, with some concepts needing 1.9 MWe (megawatts electric) for the journey itself.
Reliability & Redundancy: Critical safety systems demand high availability, often necessitating redundant power sources, like multiple nuclear reactors or large battery/fuel cell backup.
Power Technologies Considered:
Nuclear Fission Systems: Fission power (like Kilopower) is a strong candidate for its mass efficiency and continuous power, providing both electricity and heat, crucial for ISRU and reliability.
Solar Arrays: Roll-out or advanced photovoltaic blankets are an option, but limited by dust, available area, and nighttime needs, requiring significant energy storage.
Energy Storage: Advanced batteries (lithium-ion) and regenerative fuel cells are vital for bridging gaps in solar power or providing backup.
Example Mission Architectures:
Early Missions (2010s Studies): Concepts used two 40 kWe fission systems for 500-day stays, with one primary unit for ISRU and a backup near the habitat.
DRA 5.0 (Design Reference Architecture): Explored options requiring significant power for habitat, science, and ISRU, with pre-deployed cargo landers.
In essence, NASA's power strategy balances mission goals (science, ISRU, crew size) with technology capabilities, leaning heavily towards reliable nuclear systems for higher power needs while integrating robust energy storage for all scenarios
For a Mars garage or any other structure, power systems need reliability in dust and cold, likely combining solar arrays with advanced batteries (like Lithium-ion or supercapacitors) for peak loads and consistent energy, supplemented by Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs) or future Nuclear Fission Reactors for baseline power, especially during dust storms and night, alongside energy storage and distribution systems (PMAD) to manage variable demands for tools and habitat functions.
Primary Power Sources
Solar Arrays (Photovoltaics): Efficient when sunlight is available but challenged by dust accumulation and reduced intensity during Martian winter/storms, requiring regular cleaning.
Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs): Use natural decay of plutonium to generate continuous heat and electricity, providing reliable, long-term power independent of sunlight, excellent for baseline needs.
Nuclear Fission Reactors: For larger, sustained power needs (like industrial processes or larger habitats), small fission reactors offer high power output but require significant shielding for radiation.
Energy Storage & Management
Batteries: Rechargeable lithium-ion batteries (like those used on rovers) handle peak power demands, while advanced alternatives like graphene supercapacitors offer faster charging and wider temperature tolerance.
Power Management & Distribution (PMAD): Essential systems to convert, condition, and distribute power from sources to loads, handling start-up, shutdown, and dynamic events.
Supporting Technologies
Waste Heat Utilization: Nuclear systems produce excess heat, which can be converted to electricity or used for habitat/regolith heating, improving efficiency.
In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU): Solar concentrators could use sunlight for heating and 3D printing/sintering, potentially reducing reliance on pure PV cells.
Advanced Motors/Generators: Electric motors are preferred over combustion engines due to simplicity; next-gen storage like supercapacitors could revolutionize rapid power delivery.
Considerations for a Mars Garage or other structures
Dust Mitigation: Systems to clean solar panels and protect equipment from fine dust are crucial.
Thermal Management: Dealing with extreme cold (using waste heat or electrical heaters) is vital for equipment and battery health.
Scalability: A mix of sources (solar for peak, nuclear for baseline) offers the best resilience, from small tools to large fabricators
#23 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Mars Medical and Health Monitoring plus of crew » 2026-01-12 10:14:13
Space for patients and staff to make use of carves out square meters for each item and needs specific lighting, Specific OR areas super clean.
Medication security and more to aid in keep crew safe and alive while on mars.
#24 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » Mars structure heating requirements » 2026-01-12 10:00:25
While this was started for the large dome of 200m being 120 m tall, that slowing was built over an open pit to gain regolith for brick its use is for all construction that mars requires for men to stay and thrive.
Not just for people Habitats but it also can be for a Mars Garage, Greenhouses, other Biomes ect....
#25 Re: Exploration to Settlement Creation » WIKI Project Designing for Mars » 2026-01-12 09:57:10
Electric drive heavy earth-moving equipment for Mars requires robust, cold-resistant components (motors, actuators, hydraulics with special fluids/seals) and power sources (batteries, potential nuclear), leveraging electric motors for efficiency in thin atmosphere, with concepts like track systems (Mars Crawler) for modularity, adapting proven Earth mining tech (Tesla motors, Bobcat designs) for extreme Martian conditions (low temp, near-vacuum), focusing on electric actuation over hydraulics where possible.
Key Design Considerations for Mars:
Power & Propulsion:
Electric Motors: Preferred due to the lack of oxygen for combustion engines.
Power Sources: Batteries (lithium-ion) and potentially radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) for remote power.
Cold Operation: Motors need thermal management, potentially sealed systems, as air cooling is inefficient in Mars' thin atmosphere.
Mechanical Systems:
Hydraulics: Require specialized low-vapor-pressure fluids and durable polymer seals to prevent brittleness and evaporation in extreme cold and low pressure.
Actuators: Electric actuators (like piezoelectric) are being developed for precision and reliability in space.
Materials: Lighter, stronger materials like titanium alloys might replace steel for structural components, reducing mass.
Chassis & Mobility:
Tracked Systems: Offer stability and can distribute weight effectively on loose regolith (Mars Crawler concept).
Suspension: Similar to existing rovers (e.g., rock-bogie systems) for uneven terrain.
Modularity: Interchangeable tools (buckets, drills) on a base platform (Mars Crawler) for versatility.
Operational Environment:
Temperature Extremes: All components must function from cold to frigid temperatures.
Low Pressure: Affects fluid dynamics and heat transfer; systems need to be sealed or adapted.
Dust: Seals and mechanisms must resist pervasive Martian dust.
Inspiration from Earth & Space:
Mine Loaders: Models like large electric mine loaders provide power and robustness, adaptable for road grading and heavy lifting on Mars.
Electric Conversions: Companies converting Bobcat loaders to all-electric show potential for Mars applications.
Spacecraft Tech: Precision actuators from rovers like Perseverance demonstrate technology for reliable space operation.
Example Concepts:
Mars Crawler: A track-based platform with modular attachments (e.g., 3D printers, digging tools) run by powerful electric motors.
Electric Tractors: Powerful electric units similar to large mine loaders, capable of pulling heavy freight trains or grading roads