Slashdot Mirror


Space Elevators Going Up

MikShapi writes "CBC is running a new piece on the Space Elevator. Nothing dramatically new, as we're all still waiting for one of the many Carbon Nanotube research centers to announce they reached the famous 100GPa red line from page 10 of the NIAC Phase 2 Report, thus obtaining 'unobtainium' [pun intended], the material necessary to build the Elevator. The report predicts this will happen during the course of the next two years or so. It's then that the fun really starts - A REAL all-out space race, open to everyone with will and a national budget, winner probably getting to own space [read last paragraph]. In the meanwhile, we can all spread the word, discuss, debate and brainstorm every nook and cranny of the program here on Slashdot, and give Edwards a shoulder by giving the program every bit of mass-exposure we can."

27 of 473 comments (clear)

  1. Top floor.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Weightlesness, radiation, and hard vacuum.

    1. Re:Top floor.. by njcoder · · Score: 5, Funny

      I just wonder if they'll be putting in one of those security cams so that security gaurds can keep themselves entertained watching couples fool around on the over night shift.

    2. Re:Top floor.. by mccoma · · Score: 5, Funny

      heck, I hope someone straps a decent antenna to thing so I get good cell phone reception, like the commercial.

  2. Emergency open / close buttons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will they have emergency override controls on the cargo deck? Watch 'Aliens' if you don't understand why this is necessary.

    1. Re:Emergency open / close buttons by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well damn, talk about serendipity, guess what just came on Encore? And it seems they've lost contact with the colony.

      I wonder if anything bad happened to them?

      KFG

  3. Doubtfull by Smitedogg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A REAL all-out space race, open to everyone with will and a national budget, winner probably getting to own space

    I predict that there will not be a space race, because the cost-benefit isn't acceptable yet. If this technology is only 2 years away (doubtful again), then there would be massive funding to accelerate the program if there was enough interest. Lack of interest now means that there is probably not going to be much interest when the nanotubes arrive.

    Dogg
    1. Re:Doubtfull by houstonbofh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There will be funding just as soon as it looks like someone else could make it. No one will want to be the president who "Lost space to the Chinese." Embarrassment is a powerful motivator.

    2. Re:Doubtfull by stealth.c · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not two years away. More like fourteen. According to the article, it would be two years away once research has produced the proper technique for creating a cable, and once someone produces 650 tons of the stuff. Earlier in the article he mused that they were 12 years away from such a thing.

    3. Re:Doubtfull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can see the headlines in 2018 already:

      OPENING OF NEW SPACE ELEVATOR ENDS IN FIASCO
      During the official opening of the first space elevator
      a tragedy happened when the president was asked
      to "cut the ribbon". This prematurely destroyed the
      twenty billion dollar project, sending a rock with a
      100,000 km long ribbon attached to it into space.
      Read more on pages 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8.

    4. Re:Doubtfull by Jerf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If exponential growth predictions hold true, and the "first entity" locked out others from use, then the "first entity" would be a "winner" simply due to taking off too rapidly for others to feasibly catch up. That doesn't make the other entities "losers", except in relative terms; they may always be four years behind but that four years may represent a factor of, oh, as long as we're being fanciful let's say 50.

      However, I think there's a majorly false claim in there, which is that the first owner will lock out everyone else. Obviously, the first order of business when you have a space elevator is to put up more of them, and for a while they may indeed have a monopoly. But given the resources still available on Earth, someone will eventually tender an offer for a fully-completed cable that the first entity can't refuse; no matter how valuable the cable, it is possible to pay the owner off today with $X dollars, which the first entity will (correctly) perceive is more valuable to have it in liquid form, available to then invest back into other things. That price may be sky-high, pun semi-intended, but there are people on Earth who will be able to afford it.

      By buying a completed cable, they can jump-start themselves up, and as more and more entities do this, it'll start looking more even. While the first mover will have a true advantage that may last a very long time, I don't see a situation where they maintain a 20x advantage over everybody in perpetuity; the value proposition of liquidating one of the cables is just too appealing.

      This assumes a capitalistic owner of the first tether, and if the US gets there, the world can for once be glad that we see everything in terms of dollars, sooner or later, because that means that we will indeed have our price (though in the truest capitalistic tradition, it will be all the traffic can bear!). If it's not the US, well, it depends on who gets there first, but even so, it would take a very strong government to turn down the offers it would get... some of which are quite likely to be of the "offer you can't refuse" variety. ("Dear China: We still have nukes. Sincerely, All Nuclear-Capable Countries.") I still can't imagine a plausible long-term scenario where somebody maintains a massive, multiplicitave lead indefinately, though again, serious short- and medium-term advantage do accrue to them. (If nothing else, they'll need to draw on international capital to invest in space itself.)

  4. 100 GPa red line is not enough by zeux · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Getting 100 GPa for carbon nanotubes composite is one thing. Getting 100 GPa on a 100000 kilometers carbon nanotube composite is another.

    I'm more interested in the length of the nanotubes than in their strengh since increasing the strengh is quite easy (basically all we need is to increase the fraction of carbon nanotubes in the composite) compared to increasing the length of the composite.

    1. Re:100 GPa red line is not enough by liftwatch · · Score: 5, Informative

      While there is a difference between achieving 100 GPa over very short lengths and over 100,000 kilometers, it's not as much as you might think.

      The longest individual nanotubes we can reliably produce are on the order of a couple of centimeters. But once we have nanotubes on the order of a meter long, they will probably be sufficient to produce a long ribbon with sufficient loading on the nanotubes themselves.

      The limiting factor is not the length of the nanotubes in a composite (beyond a certain point, anyway), but rather how effectively the nanotubes themselves can be made to bear the load. Nanotube exteriors are slippery, like graphite, so the challenge is being able to stick them together in a substrate the transfers load effectively between them.

      For this, a process known as "functionalization" comes into play. This basically means adding small appendages to the nanotubes so that they have more traction within the substrate.

      LiftWatch.org carries regular space-elavator news items. Here are some recent articles on CNT advances:

  5. Huh??? by builderbob_nz · · Score: 5, Funny

    thus obtaining 'unobtainium'

    OK for someone who can hardly remember a thing about High Scool Chemistry, Unobtainium, what's that? A new term for good karma?

    --

    Karma? Hey I just call it as I see it.
    1. Re:Huh??? by Dr.+Weasel · · Score: 5, Informative

      Unobtainium is a term for non-existant wonder materials. In this case carbon-nano tubes are unobtainium. As in unobtainable.

  6. Oh, oh yeah? by Faust7 · · Score: 5, Funny

    In the post-9/11 world, the first space elevator, built by the United States, would be a tempting target for terrorism.

    Not if our brand-new Department of Homespace Security has anything to say about it!

    Imagine, if you will, a solid 3D column of security, with an outer edge in the shape of the U.S., starting at the U.S. and extending infinitely into space. I think if we tried, we could even make it glow the whole way. Put a scare into some of those E.T.'s.

  7. Star Trek... by TheKidWho · · Score: 5, Funny

    Second Floor Scottie!!

  8. What does human advancement require? by ObviousGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whenever a space story is brought up, some person always brings up the argument that perhaps we should spend money on the poor instead of a useless space elevator (or whatever the space story du jour is). I don't think they are arguing correctly. Space is just as important to human advancement as feeding the hungry, curing chronic diseases, and providing a livable environment is. I don't think you can order these in importance, they are all important.

    But they go hand in hand with each other. Unless we truly believe Matthew 5:5, that the weak will inherit the Earth, it will take a worldwide view of humanity to move us to the next stage of human advancement which is the eventual separation of humans from the Earth and into the galaxy. We can go this alone, leaving the world's poor to their own devices, while the space superpowers leave them behind. However, when the day comes that certain small groups of humanity take to the heavens leaving this world and venturing off into the depths of space, how will history treat those of us living now who failed to hold the hands of those unable to stand with us as we raised humanity to new heights?

    The space elevator is a great achievement. Hopefully we will begin to have a true space-based space program that is not dependent upon sending rockets to the space station. This would be the largest step in the path to Earth separation since the first manned space programs.

    However, taking steps only with our strongest leg means we are still limping. We must strengthen all our limbs as members of the human family, IMO.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:What does human advancement require? by homerjfong · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Warren Buffet often argues that since he is more productive than average, it's better for him to put his money to work than donate it to the needy. Once he dies, the argument goes, the money (a greater sum due to compounding) can be distributed. Take any discovery expedition - Columbus, Cortez, Polo - figure the aggregate value gained vs. the actual cost. This is the principle of investment.

    2. Re:What does human advancement require? by 1u3hr · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Whenever a space story is brought up, some person always brings up the argument that perhaps we should spend money on the poor instead of a useless space elevator

      I'm sure that more is spent on any one of: cosmetics, fizzy drinks, cigarettes, SUVs, cocaine. If you're just talking about govt expenditure; at least 100 times as much is spent on the military.

      If access to space is much cheaper, the benefits to the world will be immense; though it'll take a few decades. Even back in the 70s when O'Neill advocated space colonies in the L5 orbits it was possible to make a case. With a much cheaper launch method it becomes compelling.

  9. Two books... by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Fountains of Paradise by Arthur C Clarke and Red/Green/Blue Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson. Both discuss the politics and sociology surrounding the construction and use of a space elevator. Good books, well worth a read.

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  10. Nanotubes made out of carbon by cmason · · Score: 5, Funny
    Just when you think all the great ideas have been thought of, scientists dream up a concept so radical, and so innovative, that you wonder if they've been smoking reefers the size of Yule logs.

    Such is the case with a group of scientists from the National Research Laboratory in Los Alamos, N.M. (''Los Alamos'' is Spanish for ''More than One Alamo''). According to an Associated Press story that I am not making up, these scientists are proposing to build an elevator that would be 62,000 miles high. That's right: 62,000 MILES, which is 32 million stories. At the top would be a revolving restaurant serving what the scientists promise will be ''really mediocre food.''

    - Dave Barry

    --
    "If you are an idealist it doesn't matter what you do or what goes on around you, because it isn't real anyway."-R.P.W.
  11. don't be so quick... by Goldsmith · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm a physicist, and I work with carbon nanotubes. In October's Macromolecules, there was a paper put out called "Phase Behavior and Rheology of SWNTs in Superacids". It was done by a huge group of people (for a nanotech paper), including Nobel winner Richard Smalley. A press release about it was posted here somewhere.

    To make a long story short:
    They did it.

    By finding a way to dissolve nanotubes, then slowly concentrating the solutions, they formed a liquid crystal of nanotubes. By extruding this through a syringe, they formed an aligned, macroscopic, nanotube rope.

    I've seen this stuff... somewhere, and it looks just like black string.

    What's left?
    They used tubes grown by high pressure carbon monoxide, which leads to a lot of defects. If they switch to methane, the defects will largely be gone, but the yeild drops.

    They probably need to chemically connect the tubes. You can do that with an electron beam, but that would be a pain industrially. I'm sure there's a way around it.

    I'm sure that same group of people has already figured out many more problems and solutions than I can think of. I havn't seen anything out about the mechanical properties of these ropes yet, but I would expect something within a few months, and I would be surprised if it wasn't amazing.

    I used to be a skeptic when it came to a space elevator, but now...

  12. Re:Put the elevator in Cayambe, Equador by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    As far as countries on the equator go, Ecuador's competition consists of Colombia, Brazil, Sao Tome & Principe, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Kenya, Somalia, Maldives, Indonesia and Kiribati. I reckon they've got a shot!

  13. As a structural engineer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...the 100 GPa number sounds ridiculous.

    For context: the most common type of structural steel currently used has a yield strength of 350 Mpa. 100 GPa is 285 times stronger. And stronger isn't enough, it has to be dependable and resistant to cyclicle loading and fatigue, which isn't easy to quantify, especially under such unusual conditions.

    To suggest that this can be achieved in a couple of years sounds silly to me, considering whatever material used would a lengthy term of testing and a proven track record before sinking billions of dollars into it.

  14. Re:Unobtainium by Brandybuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unless it breaks, it can't tip over. It's like hanging a yoyo from your finger. There's no way the string is going to tip over onto your hand.

    I'm not the least bit concerned about the carbon nanotubules. I'm still trying to figure out how their going to ATTACH the damn thing. All buildings are essentially resting upon the Earth. This thing can't rest, it needs to be attached. For a cable this long, a "stupid hurricane" could set up a vibration is going to build to the point where the whole thing starts "walking" across Columbia.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  15. Re:Better Space Sation ? by Honor · · Score: 5, Informative

    The station is not only intended for putting things in orbit or for cargo purposes, but also for experimentation. The space elevator can only get the stuff/people up into space, but without a place to put them they arn't much use. Therefore, the ISS is still just as important as it was before, maybe more so. With the ability to more cheaply and easily get experimentation materials to the station, experimentation in space will become cheaper and more widely available. Perhaps with this new space elevator students can even go beyond the "vomit comet" and actually go into space. One easily accesible space station will inevidabley lead to others, soon.
    With the competition that all of this new technology is/will be producing, a commom point like the ISS is important to unite the major countries.

  16. Cable propagation lessons from the launch loop by klic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've fiddled with the math for these kinds of things for decades on an old idea called the "launch loop". The dynamics of long tapered cables are not impossible, but they are nasty. Very long cables are not like a stout rope to a fixed point nearby, they are more like reaction mass that vibrates. Think "Tacoma Narrows Bridge", which fell down because 1930's engineers did not take their differential equations up to 7th order.

    As a climber goes up, the surface anchoring system must pay out more cable to fill in the less tensioned region under the climber, faster and faster as the climber accelerates up the cable, proportional to the speed of the vehicle, total acceleration (including gravity) and inversely proportional to the mass per meter and the square of the propagation velocity of the material.

    This is continuously changing, so forces and velocities at the surface are changing also. The problem is, this is an underconstrained and essentially undamped end-terminated system - as the cable gets very long, you develop big standing wave complexes with only two points (surface and top anchor) to remove or store the energy. Keeping the standing waves from building up is difficult, but not impossible. However, it does add an additional constraint on launch rate; you have to spend a lot of time damping out the waves, even granting that these people are more clever than I am at modelling and removing this energy.

    Tapering of the cables, necessary even with magic nanotube unobtainium, makes the math even more "exciting", with the additional constraint that the through-atmosphere sections, along with the sections that dip into the atmosphere during wave motion, have to be thoroughly protected against atmospheric degradation (hint: C + O2 -> CO2 ). The portions of the system below the Van Allen belt have to be armored against atomic oxygen damage. Atomic oxygen will burn off the leading edge of ISS at rates approaching a millimeter per decade; the space elevator will be stationary in the gas field, but there are still a lot of fast moving oxygen atoms up to, and through, the radiation belt.

    All motor driven systems have limits to their power-to-weight ratio. To get to GEO, we have to add about 60MJ/kg. If we take 33 hours to do so, we need to move an average of 500 watts per kg (total climber weight) through the (photovoltaic or microwave) energy collectors, motors, rollers, etc. For comparison, a 1500 kg sports car with a 300 horsepower gasoline engine uses 150 watts per kg. However, that underestimates the problem. Most of the energy will be added at the beginning of the climb, during the first 10% of the travel distance, as the climber leaves the depths of the gravity well, so expect thousands of kilowatts per kilogram in the power train during this phase. If there are unexpected variations in the power, the change in climbing acceleration will add more ripples to the cable.

    I tried to avoid these problems with the launch loop (see URL below) by keeping the altitude under 100 km and the motors on the surface. Even over those "short" distances, cable propagation issues are problematic. Funny/bad things like lightning, ice buildup, fractally gusty winds, and jittery payload forces require special attention, and all reduce the capacity of the anchoring and stability cables. Everything above the atmosphere is exposed to a steady rain of the garbage that your launch system has accumulated in orbit (it all comes down, eventually). Reentry systems for human payloads (in case of failure) add weight. Problems, problems.

    At the end of the day, though, the killer issue is lack of demand. The launch loop, with about the price as a space elevator (+/- 3dB) and using materials and technologies we have had for two decades, can put 80 tonnes of payload into orbit *per hour*, for less than $10/kg. Unfortunately, nobody wants that much mass in orbit, even at that miniscule price. Perhaps "if you build it, they will come", or perhaps you end up with another white elephant lik

    --
    Keith Lofstrom server-sky.com