Are domes a meme? Like if you wanted to house people on a relatively

I imagine a dome would be able to better resist structural erosion due to its already smooth shape, and it would also be more earthquake proof than a box because its shape is widest at the base and smallest at the top like a pyramid.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (483KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 1920x1080px

>>8475353
Then I'm curious why in extreme environments on Earth domes still aren't particularly popular but boxes are rampant.

In particular that OP pic is the South Pole station where they demolished the dome and replaced it with a box, and of course there's Whittier, Alaska which is basically a regular apartment building standing alone out of the tundra.

>>8475356
boxes are cheap

domes are strong

Domes are for when you don't have backup options if your building gets damaged.

>>8475356
its a hell of a commute

File: 781341.jpg (1MB, 2048x1536px)

1MB, 2048x1536px

>>8475433
There's a 4km long tunnel through a mountain to get to it.

It's only one lane so there's scheduled times - sometimes it's inbound, sometimes it's outbound and sometimes there's no cars allowed because there's a train on it!

File: Halley-VI-Antarctic-Reasearch-Station-Hugh-Broughton-Architects-11.jpg (50KB, 728x500px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 728x500px

>>8475346
we thought domes would work great in the artic, turns out they don't. Snow builds up on top of the dome, which crushes it.

The box design is in fact a somewhat aerodynamic box on legs. Now snow accumulates under the box. This is a bit easier to shovel out. Pic related is mounted on skis so that as snow accumulates, it can be towed out from accumulated snow.


On Mars you don't have snow like earth. Sure, you have sand, but that does not stick to things like snow does.

Second pressurization and weight are bigger issues on Mars than in the arctic. You get more pressurized volume with less mass.

>>8475356
The dome thing stems from the fact that Mars' atmosphere is extremely thin and any habitats would have to be pressurized.
The weakest point of any pressure vessel is the corners, so a dome is an obvious choice. The only thing better would be a sphere, either half buried or on stilts like a large chemical tank.

However, you only need to contain ~1 atmosphere of pressure, so very early settlements would likely be a bunch of prefab cylinders bolted together like hamster tubes.

With a self sufficient colony producing it's own construction materials, building shape would be less important since you could build with heavier and stronger materials.
Opaque domes might come into play in intermediate semi-permanent settlements, or transparent domes as a luxury in well established colonies.

Maybe greenhouse domes would be a thing, but I'm guessing you would need artificial grow lamps anyway due to the sun being dimmer on Mars.

File: Pyramids-of-Giza-Egypt-20.jpg (166KB, 993x661px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 993x661px

>>8475736
Would pyramid structures work better than both domes or square structures used to house people in snowy environments?

I mean think about it, wouldn't the snow just roll off the pyramid structure due to its 4 slanted slopes on each side and it would remain relatively unharmed from the vicious hampering of over-snowing?

>>8475811
Pretty much all structures get buried under accumulating snow. Slopes wouldn't help

>>8475811
pyramids are the optimal shape for channeling the energy of simultaneous 4-day time cube.