Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I believe the problem has to do with resonance rather than acceleration. The structure will be shaken apart.

[GlyphGryph]

If poorly calculated and balanced, at least.

The advantage of the centrifuge in space rather than on the moon, is near zero energy requirements to maintain artificial gravity. On the moon, that definitely wouldn't be the case.

[thobal]

Why in space would a rotating object tear itself apart?  The entire point of the exercise is that you mimic gravity, i.e. the acceleration is 9.8 m/s.  If you apply a little logic to the situation for a moment you can see that we have plenty of macrostructures that withstand such acceleration, or else all our bridges would collapse and our skyscrapers would tumble...

But it's a tension load, not a compression load. Pushing together vs pulling apart.

Also, why am I still awake?

[sneakey pete]

So are the cables of suspension bridges. They'd probably use a lot of carbon fiber.
Out of balancesness causing the wheel to start to wobble is an issue, just due to the wobble itself, more than any structural one i think. It'd start precessing and eventually just start tumbling from what i remember of that unit of dynamics, so you'd need to be constantly making corrections.

[Sheb]

But with any large structure, wobble would be minimal and easily corrected with some RCS.

[mainiac]

But it's a tension load, not a compression load. Pushing together vs pulling apart.

For most structural metals the tensile strengths and compressive strengths are very near approximations of each other within the elastic range.  When you are using a metal as a structural support you don't want to subject it to forces outside the elastic range.  It's only when you subject a metal to force that start to deform it in an inelastic fashion that the differences between compressive and tensile strength become significant but you dont want to be doing that with your structural steel or the like.  But I can see why you might bring this up, there are materials where that distinction is quite important.

[GreatWyrmGold]

If poorly calculated and balanced, at least.

The advantage of the centrifuge in space rather than on the moon, is near zero energy requirements to maintain artificial gravity. On the moon, that definitely wouldn't be the case.

Um.
Near-zero energy requirements to keep a centrifuge spinning? What universe are you in and how can I join?
And what makes space-centrifuges different than Lunar centrifuges?

Anyway, I think it's obvious that planetary settlements will always be needed. You know, for resources and such? I also suspect that planets will be much, much larger than any space structures we build for a very, very, very long time.

[Sheb]

Well, you don't loose energy to friction at the hub in space. Also, probably easier without gravity.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Gravity, maybe, but the "no friction thing" doesn't sound right.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it that centrifugal force (centripetal?) provides an acceleration mimicking the acceleration from gravity?

[Sheb]

Well, if you're doing a wheel on the moon, you're going to loose energy to friction that you wouldn't loose in space.

[thobal]

Well, if you're doing a wheel on the moon, you're going to loose energy to friction that you wouldn't loose in space.

Not sure why energy is a big concern. The power requirements would be negligible compared to the amount needed to heat and cool the damn thing, keep the air fresh, and the water treated. It's basically a circular train.

And dont say "moving parts = more maintenance", because the mass balancing system you'd need on a freewheel is as, if not more, complex.

[Thecard]

Well, if the ship was automatically spinning with the same velocity in a circle around it, it would be easier, I think.
That's probably be hard as fuck to calculate and execute though.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Rotating in general causes problem for spacecraft if you want to expand them. Or have any contact with the outside universe, actually.

[Flare]

I can easily see a problem with the 'whole station is rotating' idea.

Namely, it's be harder for something to dock with it. Not impossible, but a lot harder.
It's be like Elite. A lot of dying. Or at least, it would be like that with me.

Why not have the dock in the middle of the flywheel. The docking apparatus just needs to be place on ball bearings and a motor to counter act the small amount of friction and you now a stationary, self adjustable dock.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Better.