You are not logged in.
In past centuries, on Earth, it was common for utility services to be delivered above ground.
In recent decades on Earth, there has been an increasing shift from above ground utilities to underground ones.
The extra up front costs are small compared to the downstream savings.
This topic is offered for NewMars members who would like to document best practices for installation of services of all kinds that will be needed by communities on Mars. Those communities will (most likely) ** all ** be underground, and certainly all utilities will be under the surface of the terrain.
(th)
Offline
This opening post provides a link to a set of guidelines for installation of underground electrical service in a region of the United States, in 2022.
https://www.firstenergycorp.com/content … -guide.pdf
NewMars members are welcome to contribute similar links for water, sewer, telephone/cable and other services that may be needed.
(th)
Offline
The reason for earth has to do with urban cities density that leaves no room for poles for the most part, but mars have a different requirement based on we will be below ground level from nearly the start to reduce radiation exposure.
Homes for mars underground need above the people living in them meters above them to reduce that exposure and if we are multi floor them the entrance for the utilities will be deep and to reduce infrastructure one will share tunnels with them to aid in building with multi use in mind.
It's not just about a 3-inch diameter pipe to carry low level power to a home or water, air or sewerage away. It's going to be about how to maximize shared construction for ease of installation.
Offline
From the government of Nunavut. The same Canadian northern territory where FMARS is located.
GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICE for NORTHERN WATER and SEWER SYSTEMS
Offline
For RobertDyck re #4
Thank you for providing a link to the guidelines for infrastructure in the Northwest Territories of Canada!
In my first scan of this long document, I noticed this item:
Buried Piping Considerations
In Southern areas, buried pipes are generally placed below the depth of seasonal frost to protect
them from freezing. In the North, this approach is usually either impossible due to the year-round
presence of frozen ground below the seasonal frost zone, or impractical due to the depth of
seasonal frost. Instead, insulated piping is placed either above ground or underground and the
water is heated and kept continuously circulating. More detailed discussion of underground piping
is provided in Sections 3, 4, 8, and 11.
The mention of constantly circulating water reminds me of a concept sometimes used in motels and a few homes, to keep a small flow of hot water flowing so that the guests always have hot water immediately available.
In the case of the Canadian recommendation, the purpose appears to be to keep the water from freezing, although I wonder if monitoring of temperature of the flow might also seem advisable.
Because Mars is cold compared to Earth, these practices seem applicable.
(th)
Offline
To be technical, the Northwest Territories were split into 2 territories in 1993. Canada now has 3 territories: Yukon adjacent to Alaska, then Northwest Territories, then the eastern part of the north is Nunavut. The boundary between Northwest Territories and Nunavut roughly follows the tree line. The boundary weaves in and out of the tree line so both territories have some of the tree boundary. There are plants and animals that live on the boundary. This means the vast majority of Nunavut is tundra. A bit in the south, just north of Manitoba, is sub-arctic taiga forest. Northwest Territories is almost entirely taiga forest.
Taiga is forrest on permafrost, stunted trees growing in shallow soil resulting in storms causing the trees to lean over.
Offline
For RobertDyck re #6
We may be branching a bit from the focus of this topic, but I'm hoping you will be willing to pursue the question I'm about to pose ... if you think it is worth pursuing, we can start a new topic better suited ...
Your mention of the tundra, in explaining the geography of Canada, brought to my mind (for some reason) a vision of "ships" "floating" on the tundra, able to withstand freeze/thaw cycles because of buoyancy. It this a realistic vision, or would the terrain creep over the sides of such ships, and entomb them?
I ask because there is a LOT of land available for human habitation, if the scenario I've offered is practical.
The folks who choose to live on tundra must exist, because there have been so many so situated throughout the millennia.
(th)
Offline
Inuit are the people formerly known as Eskimo. The don't like the name Eskimo. They live in houses. An igloo is a temporary winter shelter for hunting. Modern houses are built like houses you and I are familiar with, except no basement and they're built on stilts. Cold air is allowed to blow beneath the home so the ground does not melt. Without this, heat from the home will melt permafrost causing the house to literally sink into the ground.
There are a number of issues with northern living. Traditional food crops will not grow so.food is an issue. Traditional Inuit diet includes whale blubber, fish, seal, caribou, walrus, muskox, polar bear, wild birds and their eggs. They don't eat a lot of vegetables.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_cuisine
Mining is only viable until the mine plays out. So how do people earn a living? No money, no community.
Another issue is home heating. Environmental activists are trying to claim any fuel with carbon is evil: diesel fuel, fuel oil, natural gas, etc. How do you heat a northern home? In Manitoba most homes are heated with natural gas. Expansion would stir up environmentalists who seem to oppose all human existence.
Offline
For RobertDyck re #18
First, thanks for the reminder of the challenging lives of the Intuit peoples! You've spoken of their lives before, and it is good to have a reminder from time to time. Second, thanks for the reminder of poles to keep houses above the tundra.
I'm hoping you will consider my question ... if you had a boat (ocean going or Great Lakes) sitting on the Tundra, my question is... would it sink until it floats, or would the terrain climb up the hull and cover the deck?
I would imagine no one has tried the experiment.
In the arctic, it is my understanding that in past times, ships have been crushed by ice as the ocean froze around the ships. The Endurance is a classic example, from Antarctic exploration.
If a modern ice breaker were set in the Tundra, what would happen?
Would the ship float, or would the physics of the situation somehow overwhelm the vessel?
It is clear that poles work! You've reminded us of their effectiveness on more than one occasion.
Would the hull of a Tundra Floating Vessel (TFV) have a special shape?
(th)
Offline
For RobertDyck re Tundra as Mars Equivalent for Personnel Training/Development
In nearby topics, our NewMars associates are hard at work imagining a future with abundant energy supplied from the Earth's core.
Your mention of the tundra region in Canada led me to imagine a "sea" of suitable "tundra vessels" "floating" on the utherwise unusable soil, and hosting a high tech community able to work over the Internet to provide outside income, while all sorts of local businesses come into being on the My Hacienda model.
(th)
Offline
For mars easy of making the pipe go into the ground will not be by digging a trench and then back filling it. Mars has a much deeper frost line, and the Insight probe showed the difficulty with trying to go deep into the ground.
So, we are going to dig 1 hole to get below the frost and then tunnel to excavate plenty of room to do everything in shirt sleeve not space suits.
Much like homes on earth the entrance into the home will be at the lowest point of its structure.
Offline
tahanson43206,
Oh, now I understand. I thought you meant something else, not an actual sea-going ship parked on land. I don't think anyone has tried it, but it should work. Sea ice moves with currents, has a nasty habit of crushing ships. On tundra a ship should sink until it's at a level where it would float in water. The problem is permafrost melting. I could blather on about wet mud having a higher specific gravity than clean water, resulting in buoyancy when the ship sits higher than it would in either fresh water or salt water. However, permafrost is nasty stuff. Most likely the ship would sunk until it achieves buoyancy at the same level as fresh water. But it should stop sinking at that point.
Crushing would still be an issue. Ground close to the surface undergoes seasonal freeze/thaw cycles. The ship would have to be strong enough to withstand wet mud surrounding the ship freezing solid. Ice has greater volume than liquid water, resulting in lower density which is why it floats. But that also means wet mud expands as it freezes. Where I live, fence posts must be dug 4 feet deep to prevent the the freeze/thaw cycle from pushing the post up out of the ground. It's only a little each year, but the fence post can be "spit out" over a number of years. In the 1950s some house builders tried to construct houses with just a concrete pad, no basement. The result was corners of the house "heaved" when ground under that corner froze. Ground will freeze sooner and to a greater depth under a corner than a flat side of the house, because cold is exposed from two sides. A house will always "heave" unevenly. When it does, twisting will break open cracks in exterior walls. Cracks can be so large you can see daylight through. Weather right now at 11:14am is -29°C (-20°F), so a crack in the exterior wall will create a very cold draft!
So house construction requires a basement where there is no permafrost. Where there is permafrost, construction requires piers or some other support to keep it just enough above ground that cold air can blow beneath the structure.
Documents I read from the Core of Engineers when building in Alaska, permafrost can be as strong as concrete. Permafrost is not just permanently frozen ground water, there's mud and gravel mixed in. The colder it is, the harder it is. It's nasty stuff! The team for NASA's Mars InSight lander should have tested their penetrater in permafrost in Alaska. They could hope that the ground on Mars was dry, but "oops" it wasn't.
Offline
For RobertDyck re #12
I am delighted to see your response to my trial balloon for a "Tundra Schooner" .... it is time to create a new dedicated topic.
Thanks for providing the impetus for this productive side-branch of the Underground Utilities topic.
(th)
Offline