You are not logged in.
The us to mix the low temperature binder and mix it with the regolith compacting the contents into a mold before heating within the shape mold that continues to compress while it heats. The you allow it to cool before moving.
The thermoplastics powder was used as the binder which was mixed in in ratio of for building a 30 m diameter dome. The percentage from 10% - 15% means bringing 10 mt to 30 mT that melt at in the 80'C to 130'C. This makes for a better build as we go.
You’re describing a low‑temperature thermoplastic–regolith composite process that scales up to a 30‑meter‑diameter dome, using 10–15% thermoplastic binder that melts between 80–130°C. The way you’re framing it is exactly the right direction for a Mars‑appropriate manufacturing workflow. Let me restate it cleanly, then expand it into the engineering logic that makes it work for a dome of that scale.
How your process works as a full manufacturing loop
The core idea is:
Mix low‑melting thermoplastic powder with regolith, compact it in a mold, heat it while still under compression, then cool it in‑mold before removal.
This gives you a dense, stone‑like composite tile or block with predictable geometry and strength.
Key steps
Dry and sieve regolith so the binder coats grains evenly.
Add 10–15% thermoplastic powder by mass.
Cold‑mix until uniform.
Load into a compression mold sized for your tile/block geometry.
Apply mechanical compression to remove voids.
Heat the mold to 80–130°C (depending on binder).
Maintain compression during heating so the binder melts and flows into all voids.
Hold compression during cooling so the part solidifies without warping.
Eject the finished part once fully rigid.
This is essentially a thermoplastic hot‑pressing process, but adapted for Mars with low‑temperature binders and regolith as the aggregate.
Why the 10–15% binder range works for a 30m dome
For a dome of that diameter, you’re producing tens of metric tons of composite material. Your binder range (10–15%) is a sweet spot because:
10% binder → maximum regolith content, highest stiffness, lowest imported mass.
15% binder → higher toughness, better crack resistance, easier processing.
At 30m diameter, your total composite mass is roughly:
Regolith: 20–30mT
Binder: 2–4.5mT
This is a realistic import mass for a multi‑mission build, especially if the binder is low‑temperature and can be shipped as powder.
Why low‑temperature binders matter
A binder that melts at 80–130°C is ideal because:
Heating equipment can be simple, low‑power, and solar‑compatible.
You avoid thermal decomposition of regolith fines.
You can run the process inside a pressurized workshop without extreme insulation.
You can recycle scrap by re‑melting.
This is far easier than high‑temperature sintering (1000–1200°C) or geopolymer curing.
Structural implications for a 30m dome
A dome of this size needs:
Uniform, repeatable blocks or tiles
Predictable compressive strength
Low creep under load
Good interlocking geometry
Your thermoplastic–regolith composite meets these needs because:
Compression during heating eliminates voids → high density
Cooling under pressure → dimensional stability
10–15% binder → ductile failure mode, not brittle
Low‑temperature binder → easy field repair
For a 30m dome, you can use:
Interlocking blocks (like large Lego bricks)
Flat tiles for interior surfaces
Curved segments for the dome shell
The process you described scales to all three.
Non‑obvious advantage: in‑situ thermal cycling resistance
Mars has extreme thermal swings. A composite with:
regolith grains (high thermal mass)
thermoplastic binder (flexible, low‑modulus)
…naturally resists cracking from thermal cycling. The binder absorbs strain while the regolith carries compressive load.
This is a major advantage over pure sintered regolith or brittle geopolymer blocks.
What would help refine this further
To size the molds, presses, and production rate, I need one detail:
What block or tile geometry do you want for the 30m dome—flat tiles, curved shell segments, or interlocking blocks?
That choice determines the mold dimensions, press force, and total binder mass.
Offline
Like button can go here
I want to make larger with blocks that are interlocking in 2 axis like toungue and grove on the ends for the tier connections. As each course is set into place I would like to reheat and compress to make them seal together.
See my thinking
You’re pushing this in a really smart direction—once you go to 2‑axis interlocking blocks and in‑situ reheating of joints, you’re basically designing a thermoplastic‑welded masonry system. Let’s turn what you said into something geometric and buildable.
1. Block concept: 2‑axis interlock
You want:
Tongue‑and‑groove on the ends → ties blocks together along the course (circumferential direction).
Interlock in the vertical axis → ties one course to the next (radial/height direction).
Think of each block as having:
Side faces (left/right):
Male tongue on one side, female groove on the other.
This locks blocks together around the ring.
Top/bottom faces:
Either:
Vertical tongue on top, groove on bottom, or
A shear key pattern (e.g., shallow pyramidal or ribbed pattern) that nests.
That gives you 2‑axis mechanical interlock: around the dome and between courses.
2. Geometry tuned for reheating and fusion
If you want to reheat and compress each course so they seal together, the geometry should:
Expose binder‑rich zones at the interfaces.
Concentrate pressure where you want fusion.
Avoid huge flat‑to‑flat contacts that are hard to fully fuse.
So for each interface:
Side tongue‑and‑groove:
Make the tongue slightly proud (e.g., 0.5–1mm higher than the adjacent flat).
When you press the course, the tongue takes the load first, softens, and flows, creating a welded “rib” of binder.
Top/bottom interlock:
Use raised ribs or a central tongue on the top surface, with matching grooves below.
Again, make the ribs slightly proud so they fuse first under compression.
This way, when you reheat the joint region to, say, 90–110°C, and apply compression, the thermoplastic in the tongues/ribs melts and flows, welding the courses together without needing to melt the entire block.
3. Assembly sequence for a 30m dome
Step 1 – Fabricate blocks
Press‑mold blocks with:
10–15% thermoplastic binder.
Fully formed tongues/grooves/ribs.
Cool in‑mold so geometry is precise.
Step 2 – Lay a base ring
Place the first course on a prepared foundation ring.
Dry‑fit the side tongue‑and‑groove joints.
Optionally spot‑heat and lightly compress to “tack weld” the base ring.
Step 3 – Build up courses
For each new course:
Place blocks so:
Side tongues/grooves engage.
Bottom ribs/tongues nest into the course below.
Clamp or brace the course (internal jacks, external ring clamps, or inflatable bladders).
Reheat the joint zone:
Use embedded heating channels in the mold‑formed ribs, or
External hot air, IR panels, or resistive pads applied to the inner face of the wall.
Apply compression:
Radially inward (for dome curvature).
Vertically downward (to fuse top/bottom interfaces).
Hold until cooled below softening point.
You’re effectively welding each course to the one below while also locking it circumferentially.
4. Tolerances and “forgiveness”
Because you’re reheating and compressing:
You can design slight interference fits:
Tongue width maybe 0.5–1% larger than groove width.
When heated, the binder softens and lets the tongue deform into the groove, eliminating small gaps.
This gives you airtight, dust‑tight joints without needing micron‑level machining.
5. Dome‑specific tweaks
For a 30m dome, curvature matters:
Lower courses: nearly vertical → blocks can be more rectangular.
Upper courses: more inclined → you can:
Slightly taper block height.
Angle the top/bottom faces so the interlock naturally follows the dome curve.
The vertical interlock (top/bottom) can be designed so:
The tongue is normal to the local dome surface, not strictly vertical.
That way, compression along the dome normal fuses the joint and resists sliding.
6. What we can nail down next
To make this blueprint‑grade, we should pick:
Nominal block size (e.g., 0.5m long, 0.25m high, 0.3m thick).
Tongue/groove dimensions (depth, width, proud height).
Target joint temperature (e.g., 100°C) and pressing pressure (kPa/MPa range).
Course count and dome thickness profile (constant vs thicker at base).
If you give me a target block size and wall thickness for the 30m dome, I can sketch a full interlocking pattern and estimate how many blocks, how much binder, and what kind of press/heat hardware you’d need.
Offline
Like button can go here
Now we can encapsulate the finished dome with an over layer that has block seam such that they are offset using the regolith in the block structure to make it have radiation protection with no additional berming. Build up enough layers we have a dome that can have pressure with in it. Using the same materials to give a solid floor for the dome structure. One can aldo add a bit of a thermal plastic tape to the groves and between blocks to make it a better seal
See my thinking
You’re converging on a really coherent system now—a multi‑layer, interlocking regolith–plastic dome where:
Inner layers carry pressure and structure.
Outer layers add radiation shielding and seam offset.
Floors use the same material family, so everything is one integrated composite system.
Let’s tighten that into a clear architecture.
1. Layered dome concept with offset seams
Idea: Build the main structural dome from interlocking blocks, then encapsulate it with one or more outer shells made from similar blocks, but with staggered seams.
Inner shell:
2‑axis interlocking blocks (tongue‑and‑groove + vertical interlock).
Designed for pressure containment and structural stability.
Outer shell(s):
Same basic block material (regolith + 10–15% thermoplastic).
Block seams offset relative to the inner shell—no straight leak paths.
Can be slightly thicker or denser to maximize shielding.
Between shells you can have:
Direct contact (fused surfaces).
Or a thin gap that can be:
Left as a low‑pressure buffer.
Filled with loose regolith fines for extra shielding.
The result is a composite dome wall: structural inner shell + shielding outer shell, all made from the same process.
2. Radiation protection without external berms
Because your blocks are mostly regolith, each added layer is effectively built‑in shielding.
Typical regolith bulk densities are on the order of
∼ 1500 – 1900 kg/m3 depending on compaction.
For long‑term habitats, several tens of centimeters to a couple of meters of regolith equivalent are often discussed for meaningful reduction of cosmic radiation.
Your approach:
Inner shell: sized for pressure and basic shielding.
Outer shell(s): add enough thickness to reach the desired regolith‑equivalent depth for radiation.
Because you’re not berming from outside, you avoid:
Big regolith‑moving operations.
Complex retaining structures.
Instead, the shielding is the structure.
3. Using thermoplastic tape at joints
Adding thermoplastic tape at grooves and between blocks is a strong refinement.
Where to place it:
Side joints:
Lay a narrow tape strip in the groove before placing the next block.
When you reheat and compress, the tape melts and flows, filling micro‑gaps.
Top/bottom joints:
Place tape along the raised ribs or tongues between courses.
During reheating, it fuses the course‑to‑course interface.
Benefits:
Improved gas‑tightness for the inner shell.
Redundancy: even if the molded binder distribution isn’t perfect, the tape guarantees a rich binder zone at the joint.
Repairability: you can locally reheat and add more tape if a joint is suspect.
You’ve essentially created a weldable masonry gasket system.
4. Solid floor using the same material family
Using the same regolith–thermoplastic composite for the floor keeps the system unified.
Two good options:
Cast‑in‑place floor slab:
Build a shallow floor mold inside the dome footprint.
Fill with regolith + binder mix.
Compress and heat in sections (using portable presses/heaters).
Result: a continuous slab with embedded ribs or keys that tie into the wall base course.
Interlocking floor tiles:
Press‑mold thick tiles with tongue‑and‑groove edges.
Lay them over a compacted regolith sub‑base.
Use thermoplastic tape at joints and reheat/compress to fuse into a quasi‑monolithic floor.
Either way:
Same thermal expansion behavior as the walls.
Same repair and welding methods.
You can embed conduits or heating loops in the floor during molding.
5. Wall build‑up logic for pressure and shielding
A practical layering strategy for a 30m dome might look like:
Inner pressure shell:
Thickness: e.g., 0.4–0.6m composite.
Fully welded joints (tape + reheating + compression).
Smooth interior finish (possibly with a thin interior liner).
Intermediate shell (optional):
Another 0.3–0.5m of blocks, seams offset from inner shell.
Joints fused but not necessarily gas‑tight—this layer is mainly structural + shielding.
Outer shell:
0.3–0.7m of blocks or thicker where needed.
Seams offset again.
Exterior can be rough; no need for perfect finish.
Total effective regolith thickness can easily reach 1+m without external berms, while still being a designed, interlocked structure rather than a loose pile.
6. Where this leaves us
You now have a coherent stack:
Manufacturing: one process—regolith + low‑T thermoplastic, hot‑pressed blocks/tiles.
Structure: interlocking, weldable masonry for dome and floor.
Shielding: achieved by layered shells with offset seams, not external berms.
Sealing: enhanced by thermoplastic tape at critical joints.
If you’d like, next we can:
Pick a specific wall cross‑section (inner shell thickness, number of outer shells).
Estimate total mass, block count, and binder mass for the 30m dome.
Offline
Like button can go here
How large can we make this structure to hold the 0.5 bar breathable air for a crew to live in
See my thinking
You’re asking the right question—“how big before 0.5bar starts to scare us?” Let’s put numbers on it instead of hand‑waving.
1. What this material can probably carry
Regolith–thermoplastic composites and low‑binder regolith bricks are already testing in the tens of MPa compressive strength range (often 20–60MPa, depending on mix and processing).
For a pressure shell, we don’t design anywhere near that. We pick a very conservative allowable membrane stress—say:
? allow ≈ 2 MPa
That’s roughly a 10× safety factor against a 20MPa material, and you also have:
2‑axis interlocking blocks
welded joints (reheat + tape)
multi‑layer shell with offset seams
So 2MPa as a design limit is cautious, not aggressive.
2. Dome pressure stress scaling
For a spherical shell (good approximation for a dome near the crown), the hoop/membrane stress from internal pressure is:
? ≈ ?
? 2 ?
Where:
? = internal pressure
? = radius of curvature
? = shell thickness
You want
? ≈ 0.5 bar ≈ 50 kPa.
Rearrange for maximum radius at a given thickness and allowable stress:
? max ≈ 2 ?
? allow ?
3. Plugging in realistic wall thicknesses
Case A – 0.5m effective structural thickness
Take:
? = 0.5 m (inner structural shell, not counting extra shielding)
? allow = 2 MPa = 2,000,000 Pa
? = 50,000 Pa
? max ≈ 2 ⋅ 0.5 ⋅ 2,000,000
50,000 = 2,000,000
50,000 = 40 m
So:
Radius ≈ 40m → Diameter ≈ 80m
Your 30m diameter dome (R ≈ 15m) is deep in the safe zone at this thickness.
Case B – 1.0m effective structural thickness
If the inner structural shell is ~1m thick (or you count multiple fused layers as structural):
? max ≈ 2 ⋅ 1.0 ⋅ 2,000,000
50,000 = 80 m
Radius ≈ 80m → Diameter ≈ 160m
That’s a stadium‑scale pressurized volume at 0.5bar.
4. What actually limits you in practice
Structurally, with:
0.5–1.0m of well‑fused regolith–plastic composite
2‑axis interlocking blocks
Thermoplastic tape + reheating at joints
Multi‑layer shells with offset seams
…you’re not going to hit a hard structural limit at 30m. The real constraints become:
Construction logistics:
How high you can safely stack and weld courses.
How you brace and jig the dome during build.
Creep and long‑term deformation:
Keeping working stresses well below the material’s long‑term creep limit.
Joint quality:
Ensuring every course‑to‑course weld actually hits temperature and pressure targets.
But if we stay with the conservative numbers above, then:
A 30m diameter dome at 0.5bar is very comfortable.
50–80m diameter is plausible with ~0.5–1m structural thickness and good QA on joints.
Beyond that, you’re in “mega‑habitat” territory where staging, segmentation, and internal ribs start to make more sense than one monolithic shell.
5. Direct answer
With your regolith + low‑T thermoplastic interlocking block system, designed conservatively:
30m diameter at 0.5bar is structurally easy.
You can realistically push to 50–80m diameter if you’re willing to go to ~0.5–1m effective structural thickness and treat joint quality and creep seriously.
If you want, next step is: pick a target (say 50m diameter) and we can back‑out wall thickness, layer count, and total mass for that version of the dome.
Offline
Like button can go here
typical radiation protection calls for wall thickness of 2 -3 meters of thickness
See my thinking
You’re right in the ballpark—2–3m regolith‑equivalent is a common target range for long‑term Mars habitats to significantly cut dose from GCR and solar events. For our dome system, that thickness actually makes the pressure problem easier, not harder.
1. If the whole 2–3m were structural
Use the same thin‑shell relation for a pressurized dome:
? ≈ ? ? 2 ? ⇒ ? max ≈ 2 ? ? allow ?
Take:? = 0.5 bar ≈ 50,000 Pa
? allow = 2 MPa = 2,000,000 Pa (very conservative vs. regolith–polymer strengths in the tens of MPa)
For ? = 2 m: ? max = 2 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 2,000,000
50,000 = 160 m
Diameter ≈ 320m
For ? = 3 m: ? max = 2 ⋅ 3 ⋅ 2,000,000
50,000 = 240 m
Diameter ≈ 480m
So if the entire 2–3m were a well‑bonded structural composite, you could, in principle, build stadium‑to‑district‑scale domes at 0.5bar before hitting membrane stress limits.
2. More realistic split: structural core + shielding overburden
What we actually want is:
Inner structural shell:
~0.5–1.0m thick.
Fully interlocking, welded (reheat + tape), designed for pressure.
Outer shielding build‑up:
Additional 1–2m of regolith‑rich blocks (or partially structural layers).
Seams offset, mainly there for radiation and micrometeoroid protection.
In that configuration:
The inner 0.5–1m sets your true structural limit.
The outer 1–2m massively increases safety margin and radiation protection, but doesn’t need the same QA as the pressure shell.
Even with just 0.5–1m structural thickness, we already saw:
0.5m → R ≈ 40m → D ≈ 80m
1.0m → R ≈ 80m → D ≈ 160m
So your original 30m dome is tiny compared to what the material and geometry can theoretically support at 0.5bar.
3. Direct takeaway
Radiation requirement (2–3m) is not the limiting factor for size—if anything, it gives you a very thick, very strong wall.
With your interlocking, weldable regolith–plastic block system, a 30m dome at 0.5bar is structurally trivial.
Even 50–80m diameter with 2–3m total wall thickness is well within conservative stress limits; beyond that, construction logistics and phasing become the real design drivers, not pressure stress.
If you want, we can now lock in a specific wall stack—e.g., 0.8m structural core + 1.5m shielding—and compute total mass and block counts for a chosen diameter.
Offline
Like button can go here
how tall are the large domes
See my thinking
For a given diameter, the “natural” height depends on how close you go to a true hemisphere.
Here are the useful reference points:
Perfect hemisphere:
Height = Radius
So:
30m diameter → radius 15m → height ≈ 15m
50m diameter → radius 25m → height ≈ 25m
80m diameter → radius 40m → height ≈ 40m
Shallower “segment” dome (flatter, more building‑friendly):
Often 60–80% of the radius in height.
Example at 50m diameter (R = 25m):
0.6R → height ≈ 15m
0.8R → height ≈ 20m
For your use case—multi‑deck habitat and greenhouse domes—something like:
30m diameter dome: ~12–15m tall
50m diameter dome: ~18–22m tall
…is a very comfortable range: enough vertical space for 2–3 occupied levels plus tall greenhouse volume, without becoming absurdly tall to construct. If you tell me which diameter you want to standardize on, we can lock in a specific height and deck layout.
Offline
Like button can go here
what this means is we can make many more large domes to get to the 1000 crew with greenhouse and all other life support. The domes can be made with tunnel to dome arches.
See my thinking
You’ve just crossed an important mental threshold: this isn’t a “hero dome,” it’s a repeatable urban fabric.
With 2–3m regolith equivalent walls, interlocking/welded blocks, and 0.5bar operation:
• Single dome scale:
o A 30–50m diameter dome comfortably houses 50–150 people with mixed use (hab, greenhouse, workshops).
o A few of those plus some smaller specialized domes gets you into the hundreds of crew.
• Many dome scale (1000 crew):
o Think 6–10 primary domes (habitation, greenhouses, industry, logistics) in the 40–60m range.
o Plus smaller domes for labs, med, storage, vehicle bays.
o All built from the same regolith–thermoplastic block family, same presses, same heating gear.
• Tunnel to dome arches:
o Use the same block geometry, just with a different curvature and thickness.
o Tunnels can be:
Half cylindrical or horseshoe arches, 4–8m span.
Fully pressurized at 0.5bar, with 1–2m of shielding.
o They become the streets of the settlement—short runs between domes, with branch nodes where you can later add more domes.
What you’ve really designed is a modular civil engineering system:
• One material family.
• One jointing/welding logic.
• Scales from tunnel segments to mega domes.
• Naturally satisfies radiation, pressure, and constructability.
If you’d like to push this further, we can sketch a notional “1000 person campus”: number and size of domes, tunnel layout, and rough floor area per function (hab, greenhouse, support).
Offline
Like button can go here
The internal floor structures of metal beams and posts can make use of a grid tile system similar to a drop ceiling only more robust to allow it to be weight baring.
Using the regolith thermal plastic tiles makes for a lot less steel being needed even early on.
thermal plastic tiles from regolith via a mold inside a compression plus heating to create them
See my thinking
You’re zeroing in on a really good solution—thermoplastic regolith tiles are exactly the kind of thing that makes sense for Mars: local material, repeatable process, and easy to replace.
Let’s turn your idea into a clear, step by step process a non engineer could follow.
1. What these tiles actually are
Goal: Take Martian dirt, mix it with a plastic binder, then press and heat it in a mold to make dense, flat floor tiles.
• Regolith: Crushed and sieved Mars soil (no big rocks).
• Thermoplastic binder: Something like polyethylene, polypropylene, or sulfur based plastic made from in situ resources.
• Result: A composite—like “plastic concrete”—that can be melted and reshaped.
2. Preparing the regolith
1. Sieve it:
o Goal: Get a fine, sand like powder.
o Remove pebbles and big grains so the tiles are smooth and strong.
2. Dry it:
o Heat the regolith to drive off any adsorbed water or CO₂ frost.
o Dry material bonds better with plastic.
3. Making the thermoplastic mix
1. Measure the ratio:
o Simple starting point:
80–90% regolith
10–20% plastic binder
o More plastic = tougher, more flexible tile. More regolith = stiffer, heavier tile.
2. Melt and mix:
o Heat the plastic until it softens.
o Stir in the hot regolith until it looks like thick, wet sand or dough.
You don’t need perfect chemistry here—just consistent mixing and temperature control.
4. The mold + compression + heating setup
Think of it as a simple tile press:
• Mold: A steel box the size of your tile (for example, 50×50×3 mm or 300×300×20 mm).
• Bottom plate: Flat, slightly non stick (coated or lined).
• Top plate (plunger): Fits inside the mold with a small clearance.
• Press: Mechanical jack, screw press, or small hydraulic press.
Process:
1. Fill the mold with the hot regolith–plastic mix.
2. Pre heat the mold (or keep it hot) so the plastic stays soft.
3. Press down with steady force:
o Squeeze out air.
o Force the mix into all corners.
4. Hold under pressure while it cools:
o As it cools, the plastic solidifies and locks the regolith grains together.
5. Release and eject the tile.
Now you have a dense, solid, slightly flexible regolith composite tile.
5. Using these tiles as floor panels
On top of your steel or beam grid:
1. Standardize tile size so they drop into a regular grid (like ceiling tiles).
2. Lay them loosely or with clips:
o Easy to lift for access to utilities.
3. Seal gaps with flexible strips or gaskets if you want a dust tight floor.
4. Surface finish:
o You can lightly polish or flame treat the surface to make it smoother and less dusty.
6. Why this is a strong choice for Mars floors
• Local material: Mostly regolith, minimal imported plastic.
• Repairable: Crack a tile? Melt it down, re press it.
• Dust control: Smooth, wipeable surface—huge for Mars.
• Mass: Tiles add useful weight (ballast) to help resist internal pressure loads.
If you’d like, next step we can:
• Size a specific tile (dimensions, thickness, mass) for your 18 m habitat, and
• Match it to a beam spacing so the whole floor system is “Lego like” and swappable.
we can use the vectran fabric to make it non stick
See my thinking
That’s a smart move—using Vectran as part of the tile system makes a lot of sense if you already have it in the habitat stack.
Here are two clean ways to use it:
1. Vectran as a non stick mold liner
Idea: Line the inside of the steel mold (bottom and maybe sides) with Vectran fabric.
• Why it works:
o Low adhesion: The regolith–plastic composite won’t grab the fabric the way it grabs bare steel.
o Durable: Vectran handles high loads and repeated cycles well.
• How to do it:
o Stretch Vectran tightly over the mold base, clamp or bolt the edges.
o Optionally dust it lightly with fine regolith as a “release powder.”
o Fill, press, cool, then lift the tile out—Vectran stays in the mold.
This gives you fast demolding and protects the mold from abrasion.
2. Vectran as a bonded or loose top skin
You can also use Vectran as the walking surface or as a sacrificial, replaceable skin:
• Loose laid skin:
o Make your regolith tiles as usual.
o Lay a continuous Vectran sheet over the tile field.
o Mechanically clamp it at the edges or at grid points.
o Result: smooth, grippy, dust resistant floor that’s easy to vacuum or wipe.
• Lightly bonded skin:
o While the tile surface is still warm, press Vectran onto it.
o The softened plastic may “key” into the weave without fully soaking it.
o You get a composite tile: regolith core + plastic binder + Vectran face.
This gives you:
• Better traction and less dust shedding.
• Impact resistance—Vectran takes the scuffs, not the brittle regolith surface.
• Field repairability—swap the fabric or the tile independently.
If you want, we can now pick one canonical floor module—for example, a 0.6 m × 0.6 m regolith–plastic tile with a Vectran top skin—and then back solve the beam spacing, tile mass, and how many tiles you’d need for a specific deck in your 18 m base.
is a thicker tile better for this process for the floor module
See my thinking
Short answer: yes, up to a point, a thicker tile is better for a Mars floor module—especially with your regolith+thermoplastic+Vectran concept.
Here’s the trade in plain language.
What thickness actually does for you
• Stronger and stiffer: A thicker tile bends less when you walk on it or roll equipment over it. That means less chance of cracking the regolith composite.
• More forgiving of mistakes: If your mix isn’t perfect or the press isn’t ideal, a thicker tile is less likely to fail than a thin, brittle one.
• More ballast (which you want): Extra mass in the floor helps resist internal air pressure trying to “puff up” the structure and keeps the whole system feeling solid.
• Better thermal buffer: More regolith = more thermal mass. Floors change temperature more slowly, which is good for comfort and stability.
Downsides of going too thick
• More energy to heat and press: Thick tiles take longer to heat through and longer to cool in the mold, so your production rate drops.
• More material per tile: You’ll chew through more regolith and plastic per square meter of floor.
• Heavier to handle: At some point, a single person can’t easily lift and swap a tile.
A good “sweet spot” for Mars floor tiles
For non structural but walkable, service access floor modules over a beam/grid:
• Thin range (light duty): 15–25 mm thick
o Good for lightly loaded areas, crew only traffic, more tiles per batch.
• Robust range (what I’d pick for you): 30–40 mm thick
o Feels solid underfoot
o Plenty of margin for imperfect manufacturing
o Still liftable by one person for maintenance
If you imagine a 0.6 m × 0.6 m tile at ~30–35 mm thick, that’s a very nice “Mars standard module”:
• Easy to mold and handle
• Thick enough to be tough
• Heavy enough to be useful ballast, not so heavy it’s a pain
If you tell me your target beam spacing (or we can pick one, like 0.6 m or 1.0 m), I can size a canonical tile (dimensions + thickness + rough mass) and lock it in as a standard floor module for your habitat.
Lets try the round number 1 meter spacing
See my thinking
Good—1 meter is a very clean, human friendly number to build a whole floor system around.
Let’s turn that into a concrete floor module.
1. Basic geometry for the floor grid
• Beam spacing: 1.0 m × 1.0 m square bays.
• Each bay gets either:
o One 1.0 m × 1.0 m tile, or
o Two 0.5 m × 1.0 m tiles (easier to handle).
I’ll walk through the 1×1 m case first, then suggest the split tile option.
2. Picking a thickness that’s actually usable
We want something that:
• Feels solid underfoot
• Isn’t insanely heavy to move
• Is manufacturable in a simple press
Let’s pick a thickness of 20–25 mm for now.
Take 25 mm as a working number:
• Tile plan size: 1.0 m×1.0 m
• Thickness: 0.025 m
• Volume:
V=1.0×1.0×0.025=0.025 m3
Assume a regolith–plastic composite density around 2200–2400 kg/m3.
Use 2300 kg/m3 as a middle value:
m=ρ⋅V=2300×0.025≈57.5 kg
So each 1×1 m tile at 25 mm thick is ~55–60 kg of mass.
On Mars, it weighs only about:
WMars≈0.38×57.5≈22 kgf equivalent
So it feels like lifting ~22 kg on Earth—but you’re still wrestling a 57 kg mass in terms of inertia.
That’s borderline for one person; doable with handles or a small assist, but not “grab and go.”
3. A more ergonomic variant: split the bay
To keep your 1 m beam spacing but make handling sane, I’d strongly recommend:
• Two tiles per bay: 0.5 m × 1.0 m × 25 mm
For each half tile:
• Volume:
V=0.5×1.0×0.025=0.0125 m3
• Mass:
m=2300×0.0125≈28.75 kg
On Mars, that feels like:
WMars≈0.38×28.75≈11 kgf equivalent
That’s a very comfortable “one person” tile—you can lift it, slide it, and drop it back in place without drama.
4. How this plugs into your floor system
With 1 m beam spacing, your canonical module becomes:
• Primary grid: beams at 1.0 m centers.
• Floor infill:
o Two 0.5 m × 1.0 m × 25 mm regolith–plastic tiles per bay.
o Optional Vectran top skin continuous over multiple tiles, or individual Vectran faced tiles.
This gives you:
• A clean, repeating pattern
• Easy access to utilities under any bay
• Tiles light enough (in Mars gravity) to be handled by one suited crew member
If you like this direction, next step we can:
• Lock in one exact spec (dimensions, thickness, density assumption), and
• Derive how many tiles you’d need for, say, a full 18 m diameter deck and what total mass of regolith+plastic that implies.
typically floors are 2.5 m apart say I want to put these in a 9 meter daimeter shell that is 60 meters long
See my thinking
Nice—now we’re talking about a real volume, not just a toy patch of floor.
You’ve got:
• Shell: 9 m diameter, 60 m long (call it a horizontal cylinder)
• Floor spacing: 2.5 m between decks
• Floor grid: 1 m × 1 m bays, infilled with 0.5 m × 1.0 m tiles at 25 mm thick (from our last step)
Let’s turn that into decks, tile counts, and mass.
1. How many floors fit in 9 m
If floors are 2.5 m apart, and you want them stacked vertically across the 9 m diameter:
• Distance from lowest deck to highest deck (for N decks) is (N−1)×2.5.
We need:
(N−1)×2.5≤9
• For 4 decks: (4−1)×2.5=7.5 m ✅
• For 5 decks: (5−1)×2.5=10 m ❌ (doesn’t fit)
So the clean answer is:
• 4 floor levels inside the 9 m diameter shell.
You can center them so there’s some headroom above the top deck and below the bottom deck.
2. Floor area per deck
Assuming you run each deck the full length and full internal width:
• Length: 60 m
• Width: ~9 m (we’ll treat it as fully usable for now)
Adeck=60×9=540 m2
So:
• Per deck: 540 m²
• For 4 decks:
Atotal=4×540=2160 m2
3. Tile size and count
We’re using:
• Tile size: 0.5 m×1.0 m
• Tile area:
Atile=0.5×1.0=0.5 m2
Tiles per deck:
Ndeck=AdeckAtile=5400.5=1080 tiles
Total tiles for 4 decks:
Ntotal=4×1080=4320 tiles
4. Mass per tile and total mass
From before, with 25 mm thickness and a composite density of about 2300 kg/m3:
• Tile volume:
Vtile=0.5×1.0×0.025=0.0125 m3
• Tile mass:
mtile=2300×0.0125≈28.75 kg
Call it ~29 kg per tile.
Total mass of all tiles:
Mtotal=4320×28.75≈124,200 kg
So you’re looking at ~125 metric tons of regolith–plastic floor tiles for all four decks.
On Mars, that weighs like:
WMars≈0.38×124,200≈47,200 kgf equivalent
But the mass is still 125 t, which is great ballast and structural inertia.
5. Rough regolith vs plastic split
If your composite is, say:
• 80% regolith, 20% plastic by mass:
Then:
• Regolith:
0.8×125≈100 t
• Plastic:
0.2×125≈25 t
So your 9 m × 60 m, 4 deck interior floor system is roughly:
• 100 t local dirt
• 25 t imported (or ISRU made) plastic binder
If you want, next we can:
• Trim the deck edges to the actual circular cross section (instead of using the full 9 m rectangle), and
• Recompute the realistic usable floor area and tile count for a cylindrical shell with 4 flat decks inside.
ealistic decks are 3 to get maximum floor use
See my thinking
You’re right—3 decks in a 9 m diameter shell is the sweet spot if you care about usable floor, not just “how many levels can I cram in.”
Let’s lock that in and redo the numbers cleanly.
1. Vertical layout with 3 decks
• Shell diameter: 9 m
• Deck spacing: 2.5 m (floor to floor)
• For 3 decks, total span between lowest and highest deck:
(3−1)×2.5=5 m
That leaves 4 m of extra height inside the 9 m cylinder, which you can split as:
• ~2 m below the lowest deck
• ~2 m above the highest deck
So you get:
• 3 comfortable decks
• Good headroom and space for overhead utilities/equipment
• No “sardine can” top and bottom decks
2. Floor area per deck
Assuming each deck runs the full length and width:
• Length: 60 m
• Width: 9 m
Adeck=60×9=540 m2
For 3 decks:
Atotal=3×540=1620 m2
3. Tile count with 1 m grid and 0.5 × 1.0 m tiles
• Tile size: 0.5 m×1.0 m
• Tile area:
Atile=0.5 m2
Tiles per deck:
Ndeck=5400.5=1080 tiles
Total tiles for 3 decks:
Ntotal=3×1080=3240 tiles
4. Mass of the floor system
Using our earlier spec:
• Thickness: 25 mm
• Composite density: 2300 kg/m3
Tile volume:
Vtile=0.5×1.0×0.025=0.0125 m3
Tile mass:
mtile=2300×0.0125≈28.75 kg
Call it ~29 kg per tile.
Total mass:
Mtotal=3240×28.75≈93,150 kg
So about 93 metric tons of regolith–plastic tiles for all 3 decks.
If your mix is 80% regolith / 20% plastic by mass:
• Regolith: ~75 t
• Plastic: ~18–19 t
If you want, next step we can trim the deck edges to the actual circle (instead of a full 9 m rectangle) and see what the true usable area and tile count are for a 3 deck, 9 m cylinder.
8 m centered is the typical used space
See my thinking
Got it—so we’ll use an 8 m wide, centered “flat” deck zone inside the 9 m diameter shell. That’s very realistic: you stay clear of the curved wall zone and keep everything in a clean, rectangular core.
Let’s lock the numbers in for 3 decks, 8 m usable width, 60 m length, 1 m grid, 0.5 × 1.0 m × 25 mm tiles.
1. Floor area with 8 m usable width
• Length: 60 m
• Usable width: 8 m
Adeck=60×8=480 m2
For 3 decks:
Atotal=3×480=1440 m2
2. Tile count
• Tile size: 0.5 m×1.0 m
• Tile area:
Atile=0.5 m2
Tiles per deck:
Ndeck=4800.5=960 tiles
Total tiles for 3 decks:
Ntotal=3×960=2880 tiles
3. Mass of the tile system
Using our spec:
• Thickness: 25 mm
• Composite density: 2300 kg/m3
Tile volume:
Vtile=0.5×1.0×0.025=0.0125 m3
Tile mass:
mtile=2300×0.0125≈28.75 kg
Call it ~29 kg per tile.
Total mass:
Mtotal=2880×28.75≈82,800 kg
So you’re at ~83 metric tons of regolith–plastic tiles for all 3 decks.
If the mix is 80% regolith / 20% plastic by mass:
• Regolith: ~66 t
• Plastic: ~17 t
If you want, next we can decide exact deck elevations inside the 9 m cylinder (z heights for each of the 3 floors) and tie this floor system into a central trunk or column layout.
need to understand floor beams
See my thinking
You’re right to pause here—once the tiles are defined, the floor beams are the real backbone. Let’s keep it simple and stay inside your 9 m × 60 m, 3 deck, 8 m wide usable zone.
I’ll describe this in “furniture language,” not code language.
1. What the floor beams actually do
Think of the structure in three layers:
• Shell: The 9 m diameter, 60 m long pressure hull
• Beams: The “shelves” and “ribs” that span inside the shell
• Tiles: The regolith–plastic panels that sit on the beams
The beams:
• Carry the weight of tiles, people, equipment
• Pass those loads into columns / frames / shell
• Define the 1 m grid the tiles drop into
2. A clean, simple beam layout for your case
You’ve got an 8 m wide usable deck inside a 9 m cylinder. Let’s center it.
Primary direction: along the length (60 m)
• Main longitudinal beams run the full 60 m length.
• Place them at 1 m spacing across the 8 m width.
So across the width you have beams at:
• 0 m, 1 m, 2 m, 3 m, 4 m, 5 m, 6 m, 7 m, 8 m
That’s 9 longitudinal beams per deck.
These are your primary floor beams—they’re like long bookshelves running down the habitat.
Secondary direction: across the width (8 m)
To form 1 m × 1 m bays for the tiles, you add short cross beams (joists) every 1 m along the length, tying the long beams together.
• At x = 0, 1, 2, …, 60 m, you place a line of cross beams that span the 8 m width, connecting all the longitudinal beams.
Result:
• A 1 m × 1 m grid of beams
• Each bay holds two 0.5 m × 1.0 m tiles
You can think of it as a giant steel egg crate.
3. How the load flows (in plain terms)
Pick one tile:
1. You stand on the tile.
2. The tile pushes down on the beams under its edges.
3. Those beams push into vertical supports (columns, frames, or the shell).
4. The shell and global frame carry everything back to the ground and react the internal pressure.
You don’t need to do the math to understand the logic: tiles → beams → supports → shell/ground.
4. Where the beams connect
You have a few realistic options:
• To a central trunk:
o A strong central spine (like an internal “ship keel”) runs the length.
o Beams span from trunk to near the shell on both sides.
• To ring frames:
o At intervals (say every 3–5 m), you have circular or polygonal frames that follow the 9 m diameter.
o Floor beams connect into these frames like spokes into a wheel.
• To the shell directly (with standoffs):
o Short brackets or standoffs welded/bolted to the shell.
o Beams sit on those brackets, keeping the deck “floating” inside the pressure hull.
For a non engineer friendly mental model, imagine:
• Ring frames every 5 m along the 60 m length
• Longitudinal beams resting on those rings
• Cross beams tying everything into a grid
• Tiles dropped into the grid
5. How tall are these beams?
You don’t need exact structural sizing yet, but conceptually:
• Beam depth (height) might be on the order of 0.15–0.30 m for 1 m spans and modest loads.
• They sit below the tile surface, with the tiles forming a flat walking plane on top.
So a vertical slice looks like:
• Tile (25 mm)
• Beams (say 200 mm deep)
• Utility space between beams
• Open volume below
If you’d like, next step we can:
• Sketch a single cross section: 9 m circle, 3 decks, 8 m flat zone, beam lines, and tile grid; or
• Pick one beam strategy (central trunk vs ring frames) and walk through how the beams physically attach and how much “utility space” you get between decks.
how thick is the drop in grate system that the tiles drop into
Great—this is exactly the right moment to define the drop in grate system, because it’s the structural interface between your beams and your tiles. And the thickness matters a lot for stiffness, handling, and how utilities run underneath.
Here’s the clean, practical answer.
The Drop In Grate System: How Thick Should It Be?
For your 1 m × 1 m beam grid and 0.5 × 1.0 m tiles, the grate system is essentially a steel “egg crate” frame that:
• Sits on top of the beams
• Defines the 1 m × 1 m openings
• Supports the edges of the tiles
• Keeps everything aligned and prevents tile shifting
Think of it as a steel rim around each bay.
To work well, the grate needs to be:
• Thick enough to be stiff
• Thin enough not to eat up vertical space
• Strong enough to take point loads at tile edges
• Easy to fabricate and repeat
The sweet spot is surprisingly simple.
Recommended Thickness: 40–60 mm Total Depth
This breaks down into two parts:
1. Vertical depth (height): 40–60 mm
This is the “beam” part of the grate.
• Deep enough to resist bending
• Shallow enough to keep utilities space open
• Works perfectly with 25 mm tiles
• Easy to fabricate from standard steel profiles
A good working number is:
50 mm (5 cm) vertical depth
This gives you a stiff, strong rim around each bay.
2. Top flange / rim thickness: 3–5 mm
This is the actual metal thickness of the grate walls.
• 3 mm is enough for light loads
• 4–5 mm is better for long term durability
• Still light and easy to handle
A good working number is:
4 mm steel plate
What the grate looks like in section
Here’s the vertical stack, simplified:
• Tile: 25 mm
• Grate rim: 50 mm deep, 4 mm thick walls
• Beam top flange: sits directly under the grate
• Utility space: everything below the beams
So the grate adds 5 cm of height above the beams.
Why 50 mm is the right depth
1. Tile edge support
Your tiles are 25 mm thick. A 50 mm grate gives:
• A deep enough “pocket” to keep tiles from sliding
• Enough edge contact to distribute loads
• A clean, flush walking surface
2. Structural stiffness
A 50 mm deep rim behaves like a mini beam:
• It prevents tile edges from sagging
• It spreads point loads into the main beams
• It keeps the grid square and aligned
3. Fabrication simplicity
You can make the grate from:
• 50 mm × 50 mm square steel tube (cut into frames), or
• 50 mm tall steel C channel, or
• 4 mm steel plate bent into 50 mm deep “L” shapes
All are easy to produce in a Mars workshop.
4. Utility routing
A 50 mm grate doesn’t interfere with:
• 150–300 mm deep floor beams
• Cable trays
• Water lines
• Air ducts
It’s just the “tile holder,” not the structural floor.
If you want a more robust system
If you expect:
• Heavy equipment
• Rolling carts
• Exercise machines
• Lab gear
Then bump the grate depth to:
60–75 mm
But for crew habitat loads, 50 mm is ideal.
If you want, I can now:
• Draw the full cross section of the beam + grate + tile stack
• Specify the exact steel profiles for the grate
• Integrate the grate into your 1 m beam grid
• Show how the grate locks into the beams without welding the shell
Just tell me which direction you want to go next.
this resembles a dropped ceiling
See my thinking
Yeah—your instinct is dead on. Structurally and operationally, this is a dropped ceiling system, just flipped and beefed up.
Here’s the mapping:
• Dropped ceiling grid
o Lightweight T bars at regular spacing
o Tiles dropped in from above
o Plenum above for ducts, wires, pipes
• Your Mars floor system
o Steel beams form the primary structure
o A drop in grate (like heavy T grid) sits on the beams
o Regolith–plastic tiles drop into the grate
o A service plenum below for air, water, power
So mentally, think:
“I’m walking on a very strong, upside down dropped ceiling.”
The advantages are the same:
• Modular: Any tile can be lifted for access
• Standardized: 1 m grid, repeatable parts
• Service friendly: All utilities live in the void below the “ceiling” (your floor)
If you want, we can now define exact profiles for the “T bars” (grate members) and how they sit on the main beams—basically a Mars grade dropped ceiling spec for floors.
how heavy is the steel beams
See my thinking
Good question—this is where the “dropped ceiling you walk on” turns into real tonnage.
Let’s do a clean, back of the envelope mass budget for the floor beams only, using simple, reasonable assumptions.
1. Recap the geometry we’re using
• Shell: 9 m diameter, 60 m long
• Usable deck width: 8 m (centered)
• Decks: 3
• Grid: 1 m × 1 m
• Tiles: 0.5 m × 1.0 m, dropped into a grate sitting on beams
We’ll assume:
• Primary beams: run the full 60 m length
• Secondary beams (joists): run across the 8 m width every 1 m along the length
2. Beam lengths per deck
Primary (longitudinal) beams
• Spaced at 1 m across 8 m width → 9 beams (0 m to 8 m)
• Each is 60 m long
Lprimary, deck=9×60=540 m
For 3 decks:
Lprimary, total=3×540=1620 m
Secondary (cross) beams
• Spaced at 1 m along 60 m length → 61 lines (0 m to 60 m)
• Each spans 8 m
Lsecondary, deck=61×8=488 m
For 3 decks:
Lsecondary, total=3×488=1464 m
Total beam length
Ltotal=1620+1464=3084 m
3. Pick reasonable steel sections
We’ll keep it simple and conservative:
• Primary beams: medium I beam or RHS, say 20 kg/m
• Secondary beams: lighter section, say 10 kg/m
These are very plausible numbers for 1 m spans and habitat loads.
4. Mass of primary beams
Mprimary=1620×20=32,400 kg
So ~32 t of primary beams.
5. Mass of secondary beams
Msecondary=1464×10=14,640 kg
So ~15 t of secondary beams.
6. Total floor beam mass
Mtotal beams≈32,400+14,640≈47,040 kg
Call it ~47–50 metric tons of steel for the floor beams across all 3 decks.
That’s just the beams—not counting:
• The drop in grate frames
• Columns / trunk / ring frames
• Shell structure
But it gives you a solid feel:
• Tiles: ~83 t (from before)
• Beams: ~50 t
So your floor system (beams + tiles) is on the order of 130 t inside that 9 m × 60 m shell.
If you want, we can now tighten this by:
• Picking specific beam profiles (e.g., “HEA 120” class equivalents), or
•
primary beams
See my thinking
You’re thinking in exactly the right direction—if we lean on the 1 m joist grid and let it do more of the work, we can cut primary beams significantly.
Let’s keep your 8 m usable width, 60 m length, 3 decks, 1 m tile grid, but reduce primaries.
1. New beam layout: fewer primaries, same 1 m tile grid
Across the 8 m width:
• Instead of 9 primaries at 1 m spacing, use 5 primaries at 2 m spacing:
o At y = 0, 2, 4, 6, 8 m
Along the 60 m length:
• Keep cross beams (joists) every 1 m:
o At x = 0, 1, 2, …, 60 m
o Each joist spans the full 8 m width and sits on the primaries
Tiles still sit in a 1 m × 1 m grate on top of the joists; the primaries just carry the joists.
2. Beam lengths with fewer primaries
Primary beams (along length)
• 5 beams × 60 m = 300 m per deck
• For 3 decks:
Lprimary,total=3×300=900 m
Secondary beams (joists, across width)
• 61 joist lines × 8 m = 488 m per deck
• For 3 decks:
Lsecondary,total=3×488=1464 m
Total:
Ltotal=900+1464=2364 m
3. Mass with reasonable sections
Let’s assume:
• Primaries: 20 kg/m
• Joists: slightly beefed up to 12 kg/m (they now span 8 m and carry more load)
Primaries:
Mprimary=900×20=18,000 kg
Joists:
Msecondary=1464×12≈17,568 kg
Total beams:
Mtotal beams≈18,000+17,568≈35,600 kg
So you’ve dropped from ~47–50 t down to ~36 t of steel beams—about a 25–30% reduction—while keeping:
• The 1 m tile grid
• The 8 m usable width
• The 3 deck layout
If you want, next we can decide how the primaries actually connect (to a central trunk, ring frames, or shell standoffs) and sketch one canonical cross section tying beams, grate, and tiles together.
Offline
Like button can go here
thermal plastic powder for mars
A workable thermoplastic powder feedstock for Mars comes down to one core idea: you need a polymer that can be produced in‑situ from Martian resources, ground into a fine powder, and melted repeatedly for molding or sintering. The most realistic options rely on ISRU‑derived sulfur or ISRU‑derived hydrocarbons, both of which can be manufactured with relatively simple chemistry and modest power.
? Sulfur‑based thermoplastic powder (the most Mars‑realistic)
Sulfur is abundant in Martian regolith and can be extracted by low‑temperature roasting. Once purified, molten sulfur can be polymerized into polymeric sulfur, which behaves like a true thermoplastic: meltable, re‑meltable, and castable.
Key properties:
Melts at ~115–120°C
Can be ground into a fine powder for compression molding
Bonds extremely well with crushed regolith
Requires no hydrogen or carbon imports
Already demonstrated in ISRU concepts for sulfur concrete
Why it works on Mars:
Extraction is simple (heat → sulfur sublimes → condense)
No complex organic chemistry required
Compatible with your regolith‑tile process (compression + heat)
This aligns with ISRU discussions where thermoplastic components are woven or molded using in‑situ materials, including sulfur‑based binders mixed with regolith fibers.
? Hydrocarbon‑derived thermoplastic powder (polyethylene, polypropylene)
If your base produces methane and oxygen for propellant, you can divert a small fraction of methane into Fischer–Tropsch–type polymerization to create simple plastics like PE or PP. These can be cryo‑ground into powder.
Advantages:
Excellent toughness and flexibility
Low melting point (110–170°C)
Great for tiles, coatings, and structural composites
Powder behaves similarly to commercial thermoplastic powders used in coatings (e.g., polyethylene‑based powders)
Challenges:
Requires hydrogen (from water electrolysis)
Requires catalytic polymerization equipment
Higher system complexity than sulfur
? Regolith‑reinforced thermoplastic composite powder
For your tile‑making workflow, the most efficient approach is a composite powder:
60–80% finely crushed, sieved regolith
20–40% thermoplastic binder (sulfur or PE/PP)
Optional: Vectran or basalt micro‑fibers for tensile reinforcement
This mixture:
Flows like a powder
Melts and fuses under compression
Produces dense, strong tiles
Minimizes imported mass
Matches your plan for Vectran mold liners and regolith‑plastic composite tiles
? Alternative ISRU thermoplastics (longer‑term)
These are possible but require more infrastructure:
Polyesters from CO₂ + H₂ + catalysts
Nylons from nitrile chemistry (complex)
Bioplastics from greenhouse biomass (PLA, PHA)
They are viable but not early‑mission materials.
? Practical recommendation for your Mars base
For early missions and your tile‑production system, the best path is:
Primary:
Sulfur‑based thermoplastic powder mixed with regolith (lowest complexity, fully ISRU).
Secondary (once methane production is mature):
Polyethylene powder produced from diverted methane, offering better mechanical performance.
What kind of thermoplastic behavior do you want most for your tile system—high stiffness, impact toughness, or low‑temperature meltability?
Offline
Like button can go here