Faggot designs a space station

>>8826093
>must have artificial gravity
>must be build-able in the near future
It's fucking impossible then, faggot

>>8826101
I think you really need to have more of a 'can-do' attitude.

>>8826103
What's this thing going to be made of? What material is
>light enough to get into space
>sturdy enough to not rip itself apart while you're spinning the fuck out of it

and how do you plan to solve the problems of
>if the spinning compartments aren't weighted properly the whole station starts spinning
>it takes energy to keep the compartments spinning and solar cells on the spinning compartments will suffer reduced efficiency
>reorienting your space station is going to be a bitch

>>8826111
Thanks for responding. Great questions - exactly what I had hoped from /sci/.
This is literally the first sketch of a concept - in development.

>>light enough to get into space
The idea was inspired by by the B330 expansion module from bigelow aerospace:
https://bigelowaerospace.com/ourtech/

>>sturdy enough to not rip itself apart while you're spinning the fuck out of it
I'm planning on designing the connection ports for the various forces the modules will encounter during launch, shock during separation from the fairing & then stresses due to movement when spinning up.

>>if the spinning compartments aren't weighted properly the whole station starts spinning
This is something I hadn't considered.

Perhaps using the water system to act as kenteledge - but that hasn't been worked out yet.

t.b.h I'm not convinced that i'll even be able to spin it round a shaft in space. Even the slightest bit of friction in whatever bearing I use would begin spinning the central core. I wonder if a counter-rotating section would help.

>>it takes energy to keep the compartments spinning and solar cells on the spinning compartments will suffer reduced efficiency
solar cells would be fixed to the central stationary core.

>>reorienting your space station is going to be a bitch
Why? RCS thrusters on the central 'non-spinning' core could be used no?

File: low effort spess station.png (18KB, 601x493px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 601x493px

>>8826126
>thrusters on the central 'non-spinning' core could be used no?
like I said, the weighting of the spinning compartments is going to be a problem

i'm thinking of all the strain your modules are going to have to endure as the station reorients

the main issue is friction on those bearings. every time the station accelerates to reorient the friction on those bearings is going to increase on one side and decrease on the other. the degree to which the friction increases depends on the current position of the rotating compartment arms relative to whatever plane the station is rotating in.

I have further questions about your module branches:
1) From what position are you going to begin rotating both of them? Will they be aligned in the same plane?
2) If yes, is that starting plane the same plane as a pair of your thrusters? (this is actually very important)
3) You DO plan on starting both branches rotating simultaneously, right? Right? You care about the orientation of the core/shaft relative to earth's surface, right?

I think your station looks pretty but I don't think it would ever work practically. Sell the design to Hollywood so they can deorbit it in the next blockbuster flick.

File: ayyyy lemao2.png (1MB, 1128x770px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1128x770px

>>8826192
>I think your station looks pretty but I don't think it would ever work practically. Sell the design to Hollywood so they can deorbit it in the next blockbuster flick.

lol, my intent is to start thinking about these sorts of problems to develop the design - if I have to throw it away and start again - so be it.

The point of triangular arrangement of the three modules would lend itself to lower moments at the connection points. Basically like a large truss - providing the modules are rigidly connected - forces would resolve as tension/compression loads.

It's the same as a braced steel core for a tall building - under seismic or wind acceleration.

In addition, as these are radial, they're already bracing one another.

Basically - creating a space frame of triangular cells from inhabited modules.

Depending on the forces when I get down to modelling this thing - the addition of a ring truss/beam to fully brace the modules against one another at various radii would help I think.

>the main issue is friction on those bearings.
I'll look into this - some sort of bearing detail must be available for industrial applications here on earth. I'm thinking what amounts to a gimballed bearing.


>1) From what position are you going to begin rotating both of them? Will they be aligned in the same plane?
Perpendicular to one another would probably be better.

>2) If yes, is that starting plane the same plane as a pair of your thrusters? (this is actually very important)
RCS thrusters could be installed on the connection elements between modules. This would help to reduce loads - providing more thrust further away from the central core.

>You DO plan on starting both branches rotating simultaneously, right? Right?
yes

> You care about the orientation of the core/shaft relative to earth's surface, right?
Does this actually matter? I don't think it's practical to do attitude correction constantly.

File: fig2-12.jpg (28KB, 373x484px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 373x484px

>>8826241
Pic related - a gimbal bearing from the 1970s

>>8826195
Indeed the dream is the Von Braun idea, but for the near future - things really need to be modular to get up into space.

Also to disassemble & re-purpose for other moons and planets in the solar system

>>8826243

The bearing is going to be the tricky part in any attempt to make a rotating space station. I would think it would be hard to make something that is very low friction, completely airtight, large enough to allow people through and able to handle the sideways and twisting forces it would be likely to experience in such a role.

>>8826269
I agree actually, it will be one of the most difficult parts to deal with - but there are many high performance applications here on earth to draw on.

I think it's indespensible though. There is no chance that a docking space craft would be able to do one of the following:

>dock with a spinning shaft
>dock horizontally on the outer edge of station where it's moving fastest

Another option I considered was to have the entire thing spin and have the ability to decouple the ends of the shaft to allow docking craft

>>8826296
>park below spinning shaft
>spin until rpm are equalized
>now you aren't spinning relative to the shaft
>dock
Or alternatively, pack some fuel on the station and make it stop spinning. This seems simpler to me.

>>8826321
Matching rotational speed is a huge pain in the ass though.

Stopping the entire station seems simple - but ultimately impractical.

Imagine a station in orbit of the moon, receiving supplies from the lunar surface on a regular basis or something - no way that it would be sensible to spin the station down and up again.

I'll just have to come up with some sort of connection design that enables easy access.

File: 01-magnetic-bearing-magnetic-levitation-bearings_thumb.jpg (69KB, 500x487px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 500x487px

>>8826321
>>8826269
>>8826296
>>8826351
Magnetic bearings.

Used in fly-wheels to minimize friction.

A couple of significant problems with spinning up the docking craft are that you are then unable to have more than two docking points on your space station, and all docking craft must have their centre of mass in line with their docking port.

>>8826269
just have multiple doors.
don't make it air tight till you get to the main part of the station.

or have the main dock be airtight the tubes to the station airtight in sections.

Also this can be used to make oxygen and heat if main power cuts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_oxygen_generator

just have detachable pods

File: ayyyy lemao3.png (2MB, 788x1170px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 788x1170px

>>8826386
The bearing substructure would - and should -
be separate from the internal structure

Sorry for all the sketches, but I'm a brainlet who can't communicate well with words.

File: klavs_models304.jpg (2MB, 2048x1755px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x1755px

>>8826093
Benefits being that it can keep gravity constant while it is in motion reducing any pressure on the whole.

Plenty of rooms for stasis and criogenesis chambers.

Can be thrust upwards via conventional rockets.

Modular.

>>8826458
Also phallic in nature.

sigh....

The whale of the cosmos.
A DNA strand.

Cause nothing say "humans comin' to your galaxy, snatchin your Ayy Lmaos up" like a ship made to look like our double helix DNA.

File: BEEP BEEP.jpg (668KB, 2048x1755px) Image search: [Google]

668KB, 2048x1755px

>>8826464

>>8826494
And the best part?
The connecter point doesn't need to be a bridge.
It can be some cheap ass wire to hold the helixes together at intervals.
You can have the big ship have bridge points and our tiny helix drones have wire bridge points.

>>8826494
https://youtu.be/xeEyOQJsdi0

Here is a video showing you Aztechs relearning how to use their ancient flying technology.

https://youtu.be/xeEyOQJsdi0

lololol

>>8826494
You can launch one helix at the time.
With spin.
Without spin...
Aerodynamic...
Combined with gyroscopic pinning it becomes air resistant...
Fucking fuck me right?
Two at a time.
Dix for days.
Never ending...
Just you and me Morty.
Sailing the stars.
R-R-Rick and Morty...every day Rick and Morty forever Morty....

File: 115.png (46KB, 300x100px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 300x100px

>>8826093

>>8826526
Details on the mechanics of this?

I don't really understand why this is a better design for large scale habitats or how the internal forces resolve.

>>8826559
While it is moving foreward in space and spinning it generates artificial gravity.
When it stops spinning...gravity is turned off but it keeps moving foreward.
When you decelerrate in zero grav the wall comes to meet you. When you decelerate in spin grav you fall foreward like on a bus.

When it is accelerating it acts like a normal push on a bus.

It falls along a curved path to regulate 9.8g but as a constant throughout the ship thus preserving precious bone density.

>>8826093
>guys the oneil cylinder fits all my needs, is simple and elegant
>can i make it needlessly complicated instead? Preferably with a lot of moving parts?

>>8826559
While you are launching you sit on the bridge and it spins going up to reduce air drag.

When you get to space you go from the bridges to either the left or right helix.
Then you do space stuff :3
Also reduces weight for added cargo and extra goodies like shielding.

Radiation sux

>>8826586
And will we be in a position to build an o'neill cylinder in the NEAR future?


Retard.

File: gemini.jpg (44KB, 600x315px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 600x315px

>>8826111
Two words: Tensile strength.
Who said you can't just put a rope there?
This is the 'Bola' design, notable because it was used in Gemini 11.
Has artificial gravity? Check.
Must be buildable in the near future? Already done.

File: Gemini_11_Agena.jpg (1MB, 3000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x3000px

>>8826807
Gemini 11 wasn't exactly a station, but it worked. There is also no reason why this couldn't be extended further.

ENGINNEERING TEENAGERS EVERYWHERE

>>8826821
I'm actually an engineering mid twenties, but thanks for the input.

Why exactly do we need a space station?

>>8826126
>Why? RCS thrusters on the central 'non-spinning' core could be used no?
No. It will probably spin chaotically the moment you add some momentum in the non z direction (meaning either the y or the x, which is the plane in which the thing is rotating).

Rotate the whole thing and let it be is probably the best course of action, with solar panels stationary and streaming microwaves or something like that besides it. Docking would be a bitch.

File: dna-rna-double-helix-rotating-animation-17.gif (448KB, 320x480px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 320x480px

>>8826807
Good. Now Apply what you know to this.

File: r9Y0jVI.gif (315KB, 500x450px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 500x450px

>>8826909
Can you hear the music of the universe?

File: 9q9PY.gif (598KB, 509x504px) Image search: [Google]

598KB, 509x504px

>>8826915
The world spins round and round.

>>8826919
Why does it spin? What are fields? WHY are fields?

File: img-1079542-3-HarmonicMotion.gif (236KB, 432x182px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 432x182px

>>8826926
You can only understand when you find the gap. The gap between dimensions.
Life and death.

File: e04f0d22ebe4da70e63b2c9e13badd6d.gif (40KB, 302x302px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 302x302px

>>8826926
Imagine you did eat an apple.
But...
You didn't.
That is how king crimson works.
It just works.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (63KB, 688x720px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 688x720px

>>8826926
Why...
I will tell you why...
*takes a hit*

Left handed path mother fucker....

*Wizards away*

Wait 'till you see what science got up its sleeve fo' real cuz'

https://youtu.be/xeEyOQJsdi0

>>8826556
I have a job.
I'm an engineer.

>>8826954
Shit wrong vid

https://youtu.be/Jm2D7ohWos0

>>8826970
>>8826954
Jojo is a steaming pile of shit.

Just thought you should know.

>>8826871
>No. It will probably spin chaotically the moment you add some momentum in the non z direction (meaning either the y or the x, which is the plane in which the thing is rotating).

Why?

>>8827247
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutation

Precession. You will induce a wobbling motion into your space station if you try to change the direction of your axis of rotation.

>>8827281
Would a station like this really need constant attitude adjustments?

If adjustments are infrequent, the station could be 'spun down' to make adjustments.

If frequent....fugg

File: 1490942802646.png (331KB, 600x431px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 600x431px

Litteral anal sacks orbit around a bent shuttle
>hurr durr

>>8826915
>music of the universe
T O T A L Y
O W
T O
A K
L E
Y D

>>8826101
NASA had designs in the 60s that they could have built in the 70s if given the money. Artificial Gravity could be done easily. The old three arm designs are probably the best bet if you wanted to do it on the cheap. They also had a hexagon design but I'm hesitant to believe that the unfolding mechanism could be scaled up from the test model they built.

>>8828081
>anal sac

Wat
.... Thanks for your input, retard.

>>8828081
Why was your first thought 'anal sacks'?

Just have a chamber with beds spinning at 2g for some exercize.

>>8828968
Right, but that wouldn't fulfill the brief.

The entire point is to have a working environment that is generally less destructive to the body than 0g.

This reduces the need for high levels of activity - making more time for experimentation/operations & generally healthier every day lives for the occupants.

>>8828093
Wouldn't the corners of the hexagons have been like little pits that shit could roll into? I feel like the floor needs to be tangent to the center at all times.