The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

Grypd · 2004-11-12 06:00:02

Its a bit more difficult than that Spacenut, Mining on either the Moon or Mars will be a new experience for mankind. It is very likely that on the Moon we will actually not harvest rock but instead collect the lunar soil or regolith. Apollo astronauts found that the first 15cm of the regolith was reasonably loose but as it got further down it was appreciably more compacted and harder to remove. The problem is that earth moving techniques that are employed on the Earth will be severely limited in use on the Moon and Mars.

Why, On Earth we rely on the gravity and atmosphere pressure to give us down force and this allows digging Humans and machines to exert a lot of pressure on the ground. But on the Moon and Mars this force is negligible and we have to find other means to anchor ourselves or to use different techniques. Techniques that should be useful on the Moon and Mars are Draglines and the use of strong wire brushes. Draglines are secured by points buried into the ground and as they are pulled across the surface they by way of there design will collect materials. Wire Brushes simply use constant abrasion to fling material into a collecting bin. Which is best we will find out. But other techniques that may help is to create robot worms that burrow into the regolith with a tube deployed behind. The one thing about Lunar industry is that oxygen will be a common byproduct of our industry and we will have more than we can use. If this lunar oxygen is pumped under high pressure in blasts down that leaky tube it could blast apart the hard embedded regolith to make it easier to move. Then we could use more familiar bulldozers to scoop the materials up.

GCNRevenger · 2004-11-12 09:39:34

I don't know if there will be all that much extra Oxygen. Plus, even if there isn't much useful water on the Moon, then you could at least signifigantly mitigate fuel bills by importing only Hydrogen from Earth and using Lunar Oxygen for the return trip. High pressure Oxygen would also be useful for light-weight/high-power portable equipment if you don't need to use it for very long. A small Lunar jackhammer or stone saw for instance.

Good idea about the brush scooper.

SpaceNut · 2004-11-12 11:42:44

Another Item to be mind full of is water in general. Water is just as precious to explorers as it is to everyone on Earth. Water is one of the most crucial provisions astronauts need to live and work in space, whether orbiting Earth, working at a lunar base or traveling to Mars.

NASA Advances Water Recycling for Space Travel and Earth Use

Release gets into the details of the machine and of its delevery for use.

SpaceNut · 2004-11-15 09:31:34

While NASA tests station's staying power Agency shifts focus to research for moon, Mars trips it is realigning its self to better achieve the goal of the vision. NASA goal is to keep the station with a permanent, rotating crew for at least 15 to 20 years, "but that may extend out ... and there will be other crews on" other stations or bases. The ultimate goal, which is very lofty, is to never go without a human presence in space again.

A lot of good stuff in this article.

SpaceNut · 2004-11-16 08:48:31

Here is a quick view of what I know is in the works by foreign nations with regards to future moon missions:

SMART-1, a project of the European Space Agency, was launched in September 2003. It's taking 14 months to reach the moon -- the U.S. Apollo missions took four days -- because it's using an experimental propulsion system, called an ion drive, which starts very slowly and gradually accelerates to a high speed. It requires little fuel and is being tested for use in extremely long missions in outer space. Smart-1 is a square box, measuring about 3 feet on a side and weighing about 800 pounds. Inside are three toaster-sized instruments to study the chemical makeup of the moon in X-rays, infrared light and ordinary light.

Japan plans two lunar visitors but has been having trouble getting them off the ground. The first, a 1,200-pound orbiter called Lunar-A, originally was scheduled to take off in 1999, but has been delayed repeatedly by problems with the launch rocket. It's now slated to go up sometime next year. After settling into a 1,200-mile-high orbit, the spaceship will fire two missile-like penetrators that will drill 1 or 2 yards deep into the lunar surface, one on the side facing Earth, one on the back side. The penetrators will relay data on possible moonquakes and the nature of the moon's core. In 2006, Japan hopes to launch a more ambitious, 4,400-pound package of three satellites called Selene, the Greek name for the moon. The main orbiter will carry 13 scientific instruments to study the origin and evolution of the moon. It will spin off two smaller satellites, one to relay signals from behind the moon and the other to measure the moon's wobble as it circles the Earth.

The Indian Space Research Organization plans to launch Chandrayaan-1, Hindi for "moon voyage," in September 2007. The 1,200-pound orbiter is to circle the moon, 60 miles above the surface, for at least two years.

China, which launched its first man into Earth orbit in October 2003, plans to send up a lunar orbiter in 2007. It's named Chang-e, after a Chinese story about a fairy that flew to the moon. The Chinese space agency announced last summer that it will attempt a robotic soft landing on the moon in 2010 and a manned landing by 2020. The European Project Aurora has a goal of a manned landing on Mars by 2033, about the time the United States might be doing the same.

SpaceNut · 2004-11-18 12:08:40

Lunar leader no longer U.S. falls behind in new moon-exploration race

Four other moon missions -- two Japanese, one Chinese and one Indian -- are planned for launch during the next three years.

The LRO is still in design mode, that is where ours or should I say Nasa's is. With a planned flight in 2008, if then since the budgets are so tight.

SpaceNut · 2004-11-18 13:07:01

Thou this is about space elevators you can see that when I put forth this same concept it was right on the mark as this article indicates.
Space Elevator? Build it on the Moon First

John Creighton · 2004-11-18 14:17:10

The advantage of connecting an elevator to the Moon instead of the Earth is the simple fact that the forces involved are much smaller - the Moon's gravity is 1/6th that of Earth's. Instead of exotic nanotubes with extreme tensile strengths, the cable could be built using high-strength commercially available materials, like Kevlar or Spectra. In fact, Pearson has zeroed in on a commercial fibre called M5, which he calculates would only weigh 6,800 kg for a full cable that would support a lifting capacity of 200 kg at the base. This is well within the capabilities of the most powerful rockets supplied by Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Arianespace. One launch is it takes to put an elevator on the Moon. And once the elevator was installed, you could start reinforcing it with additional materials, like glass and boron, which could be manufactured on the Moon

This is great . This is alot less labour intensive then building a mass driver or a rail gun. Moreover, the material can be brought to a space station where a cargo ship can carry it to ISS or whereever. It should be noted that with this ellevator the moon would be easier to get to then mars.

Grypd · 2004-11-18 16:31:09

I have had this arquement on another forum, Space elevators on the moon are easier to build with imported materials on the moon and can be made now. But ironically it is this ease that means that there are cheaper and better alternatives to an elevator and mass drivers do win out. And dont get it wrong a lunar elevator is very labour intensive.

Another problem is that a lunar elevator has to be made about double the length of a similar one as on Earth. This is a lot of extremely expensive materials that must be launched from earth and as such elevators are an extremely expensive option.

Though there is another option that of a lunar pendulim. This option would collect materials from the Moon and swing it up to provide momentum a weight is on the other side. Small cargos could be launched quite fast this way. This is a lot more effective and cheaper to operate and create.

SpaceNut · 2004-11-19 06:15:39

Another problem is that a lunar elevator has to be made about double the length of a similar one as on Earth. This is a lot of extremely expensive materials that must be launched from earth and as such elevators are an extremely expensive option.

Why would it need to be so?

It would only need to reach to what would be considered Low Lunar Orbit (LLO), presumeably with a docking port for off loading of personel and minimal supplies for transporting them to the surface.

Rxke · 2004-11-19 07:07:08

No it wouldn't, it would fall back down if too short...

ERRORIST · 2004-11-19 09:21:40

Can't it be made from luner material instead?

GCNRevenger · 2004-11-19 09:31:39

The Moon has no ready supply of carbon or hydrogen (for the binder), so you can't make carbon nanotube composits from Lunar soils.

ERRORIST · 2004-11-19 09:39:28

You mean there is no carbon on the moon or hydrogen?

ERRORIST · 2004-11-19 09:46:14

GCN,
Sorry but no. It is there.

Carbon on the Moon
The only carbon Apollo rock scientists have found is the trace put there by eons of buffeting of the surface by the solar wind - the atoms and ions from the wind are adsorbed to the surface of the fine particles of the regolith. It is a trace only to be found in the upper meter or two, where it amounts to 82 parts per million. It can be harvested by picking up, then heating the surface deposits to 600 or 700 degrees Fahrenheit. If we ever did extensive helium-3 mining in similar fashion, solar wind-derived carbon, nitrogen, and hydrogen, along with garden variety helium, would be economically important by-products.

GCNRevenger · 2004-11-19 09:53:06

Do I have to read everything for you Errorist?

"trace put there by eons of buffeting of the surface by the solar wind...

Trace means in English "not alot," I don't know what you think it means...

A space elevator of the size needed for the Moon would easily consume hundreds or perhaps thousands of tons, and if you can capture a good amount of this trace carbon... say about 50%... then you will only have to process ~1.2 MILLION tons of Lunar dirt for a ~1,000MT space elevator, not counting the hydrogen needed for binder. If the concentration is 81ppm over the whole surface.

ERRORIST · 2004-11-19 10:07:25

So what? Look what we have to process to get coal or iron here on earth. Besides, the energy to do so can come from the sun. It would be an easy task for both the hydrogen and carbon.

GCNRevenger · 2004-11-19 10:10:22

No, no it wouldn't, the scale of strip-mining operation you are talking about is insane Errorist. We have a hard enough time making a robot golf cart that will run for longer then a year. Plus, since gravity is so low, you can't use conventional mining equipment at all. And just because the energy is free doesn't make it easy to get, the size of solar arrays needed to power such an operation would be gargantuan. So would the factory to produce the cells out of Lunar silicon.

Not in our lifetimes, and not in our children's either most likly.

ERRORIST · 2004-11-19 10:32:32

They could do it tomorrow. The present rovers on Mars will run for over a year by my predictions. On the moon they get more power from the sun and if they broke down we can fix them more easy since we are only four days away and we have proven we can get there already.If we made a base we can just walk over to them and repair them. Moon silicon is a good material for solar panels also.

GCNRevenger · 2004-11-19 11:21:18

Errorist, you must not have a head for figures, do you? Let me spell it out for you...

One Point Two Million Metric Tons of Lunar regolith

This is a big number. Very, very big. The idea that a Lunar strip-mining operation could process this quantity of Lunar soil in only a few years with an operation built from scratch, starting tomorrow, is nonsense.

John Creighton · 2004-11-19 11:54:04

I have had this arquement on another forum, Space elevators on the moon are easier to build with imported materials on the moon and can be made now. But ironically it is this ease that means that there are cheaper and better alternatives to an elevator and mass drivers do win out. And dont get it wrong a lunar elevator is very labour intensive.

Labor intensive? I thought you just had to spool it down and then anchor it into the soil. This sounds like something that could be done by robots more easily the building a mass driver or rail gun. I don’t think the anchor would have to be imbedded into the soil too strongly given the force at the base should be about zero.

ERRORIST · 2004-11-19 12:30:06

Labor intensive for robots? Aw, who cares about them they can be our new work force.

GCNRevenger · 2004-11-19 12:35:31

Answer: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Robots aren't that good yet, and may never be, because of the time delay between here and the Moon.

SpaceNut · 2004-11-19 12:35:56

I guess we all can be a little confused on the dynamics of a space elevator. I myself had thoughts that they could fall into rigid, semi rigid and flexible construction styles each having differing construction techniques, materials, and hieghts. All this depending as well on location that it were built.

The recent MIT one was a ribbon of semi soft material but it was anchored at the bottom but also solidly anchored at the top as well.

Rxke · 2004-11-19 13:33:10

It's all but automatic once the spools are up... Just unspool and wait 'till it reaches the ground.

But *manufacturing* the CNT and other hardware for the elevator, like laser base, cars, ... will be labour intensive. Esp. On the moon.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#126 2004-11-12 06:00:02

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#127 2004-11-12 09:39:34

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#128 2004-11-12 11:42:44

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#129 2004-11-15 09:31:34

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#130 2004-11-16 08:48:31

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#131 2004-11-18 12:08:40

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#132 2004-11-18 13:07:01

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#133 2004-11-18 14:17:10

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#134 2004-11-18 16:31:09

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#135 2004-11-19 06:15:39

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#136 2004-11-19 07:07:08

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#137 2004-11-19 09:21:40

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#138 2004-11-19 09:31:39

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#139 2004-11-19 09:39:28

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#140 2004-11-19 09:46:14

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#141 2004-11-19 09:53:06

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#142 2004-11-19 10:07:25

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#143 2004-11-19 10:10:22

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#144 2004-11-19 10:32:32

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#145 2004-11-19 11:21:18

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#146 2004-11-19 11:54:04

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#147 2004-11-19 12:30:06

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#148 2004-11-19 12:35:31

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#149 2004-11-19 12:35:56

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#150 2004-11-19 13:33:10

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

Board footer

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.