Slashdot Mirror


Details On Inflatable Space Modules

Decibel writes "Although it's been mentioned on Slashdot twice now, this article contains more details about Robert T. Bigelow's plan to orbit massive inflatable space habitats, with the first test modules to be launched next year. It also details the $50 million "America's Space Prize", with the objective to "spur development of a low-cost commercial manned orbital vehicle capable of launching 5-7 astronauts at a time to Bigelow inflatable modules by the end of the decade.""

10 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Xanadu by StalinsNotDead · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's this, too. The guy does pretty much what you describe but adds some kind of metal infrastructure as well. The structure of this type that was up in the panhandle of Florida through a hurricane fared remarkably well.

    --
    Thanks to the internet, we can now all die alone together! -SomeWoman
  2. Re:Physical Concerns? by onkelonkel · · Score: 4, Informative

    If (big if) you inflate to sea level air pressure you need to contain 15 psi. Not a big deal. A bike tire can take up to 100 psi, a plastic 2l coke bottle can take over 150 psi. Make the habitat B I G and it will hold a lot of air. If something pops a hole in it, it will take a long time (many minutes) to deflate. Somebody will have to put down their beer, float over to the hole and slap on a peel-n-stick patch.

    --
    None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
  3. These are not fragile by mrright · · Score: 5, Informative

    With all the needle jokes and condom comparisons one could get the impression that these inflatable modules are less rugged than the aluminium modules now used for the ISS.

    This is not the case. They are made out of multiple layers of kevlar (the same stuff that bulletproof vests are made of). In tests with the NASA-designed transhab inflatable module they have proven to be much more resistant to space debris than aluminium hulls.

    Also even if a particulary large piece of space debris should punch a hole in one of these modules, they are so big that there would be plenty of time to evacuate them before the pressure drops too much. A long-time station will probably also have a repair kit on board.

    Third, the problem of space debris is particulary severe in low earth orbit. But in a higher earth orbit there is much less space debris, and the stuff that is there moves with much lower relative velocities. So from a space debris point of view low earth orbit is the absolute worst case. A station at an Earth/Moon lagrange point or in deep space would need little or no space debris protection.

    --
    Private property is the central institution of a free society (David Friedman)
    1. Re:These are not fragile by scowling · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wrong. Here are two examples:

      http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/rocket_sci/ or bmech/vel_calc.html

      http://www.solarsystem.org.uk/datatext.html

      --
      www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
  4. Re:Physical Concerns? by heptapod · · Score: 4, Informative

    The only reason why a balloon goes bang when you pop it with a pin is because the rubber rips and the air is violently released. If you put a piece of scotch tape over an inflated balloon and insert a pin you'll see that the balloon didn't pop but there's a hole. The tape reinforced the balloon and kept the rubber from tearing apart.
    These inflatable habitats would simply leak air. There wouldn't be any Hollywood gratifying explosions.

  5. Re:Micrometeoroids Much? by jbeaupre · · Score: 5, Informative

    Those micrometeoroids piercing the skin isn't too bad for the bubble. Just a small hole. It's the people and equipment inside that will hate getting sprayed with debris. The way they take care of it on space stations is to create bumpers. An outer shell takes the initial impact. The meteoroid punches through, but shatters and vaporizes, spreading in a plume. The second layer then gets to absorb a reduced impact over a greater area. There's more to it, but that's the basics. To protect an inflatable habitate, it might require a double-bubble, like the Zorb http://www.zorb.com/. Inflate the outer bubble at far less than 1 atm and let it take the punctures. Still have to fix the leaks, but they will be far slower. The inner bubble will be unpunctured.

    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
  6. BTW... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...the exact opposite of an inflatable space station, is a skin tight space-suit! If we could develop that technology, space walks could become as easy as diving! (If not a smidge easier.)

  7. Re:Xanadu by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 4, Informative
    Allow the structure to cure, and you've got yourself air-tight, super-strong walls that can be repaired from pretty much any damage just by spraying more foam!

    You can start to get respect for these inflatable structures when you realise that normal atmospheric pressure is just about 10 *tonnes* per square meter.

    These structures seem to be made from a woven kevlar material.

    They also have to be able to survive impact from debris in LEO and micrometeors without simply popping.

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  8. Re:The next logical step by jcr · · Score: 3, Informative

    The enemy's door is down! Duh!

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  9. Nuclear Rockets! by serutan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Check out this fascinating detailed design for a completely reusable Saturn-V size rocket, powered by a Gas Core Nuclear Reactor engine. The engine emits non-radioactive hydrogen propellant. The rocket described would be able to lift 1000 tons of cargo into orbit and return to a powered landing, for only 5% of today's cost per pound.

    I know "nuclear" is still a dirty word, but the gas core reactor design is a completely different approach than a big pile of plutonium. Very promising in terms of power, safety and cost.

    It's a long article, 14 parts, but well worth reading. Skip the first 5 or 6 sections if you just want to know how the thing works.