Author Topic: What's Happening at Bigelow?  (Read 421889 times)

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #160 on: 01/29/2010 06:15 am »
They are the 330, and in one of his most recent interviews for MSNBC Bigelow stated that astronauts who have visited his complex are "flabbergasted"  at how spacious they are.

Quote
Astronaut visitors to the module mockups "are flabbergasted by the volume...they are really taken aback by how large these are," Bigelow said. "We are actually looking for a couple of astronauts now to join our marketing program."

"Under rotation the bottom will be the outside"

Rotational gravity? In all my digging about BA's modules I've never seen anything about rotational gravity, and once attached to a hub/power bus and other modules in the way Bigelow has presented that would be impossible. 

What I have read is that the core provides rigidity, especially during launch, and stowage for gear and provisions before and during launch.  On orbit and after inflation this is removed and placed in their use/storage areas.  Conduit and airflow goes through the compartments inside core framing members, as per one of the patents*.  Berths, exercise and work areas are arranged as shown in drawing 1 in every Bigelow generated concept I've seen.

Abut the Sundancer schedule slip - that has more to do with the economy causing Bigelow to slow down than SpaceX (separate news report).  Seems Bigelow hasn't built the construction hangar for the large modules yet, though it should be done this fall;

Quote
One key item on tap for Bigelow Aerospace this year is constructing the A-3 building, Bigelow noted, a structure that will offer 265,000 square feet and is destined to be an assembly-line facility for the company's spacecraft.

* http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20040250503.pdf

(one example - variants are shown)




« Last Edit: 01/29/2010 06:40 am by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6404
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #161 on: 01/29/2010 06:24 am »
Those designs are all for Earth gravity.  Under thrust the bottom will be at the back.  Under rotation the bottom will be the outside with the centre column as the top.

The radius of these modules is way too small for rotational gravity, and there is no evidence that Bigelow is considering that anyway.
JRF

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #162 on: 01/29/2010 07:14 am »
Those designs are all for Earth gravity.  Under thrust the bottom will be at the back.  Under rotation the bottom will be the outside with the centre column as the top.

The radius of these modules is way too small for rotational gravity, and there is no evidence that Bigelow is considering that anyway.

There are quite a lot of people who want to add artificial gravity to Mars transfer vehicles.  Even 0.1 g would send the body's liquids towards the feet.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #163 on: 01/29/2010 07:27 am »
True, but unless you rearrange the guts then put a Sundancer/BA330 at either end of a tether (or hub extensions) and rotate them around a central hub/power bus it ain't gonna happen with the current setup.  Even then you need to worry about the stresses on the works when you fire the engine(s), unless it's a high SI unit like VASIMR.
« Last Edit: 01/29/2010 07:29 am by docmordrid »
DM

Spacenuts

  • Guest
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #164 on: 01/29/2010 09:47 am »
Question.  If I needed a minimum of  1,000 cubic meters of space and lets say three BA-330's qualifies for arguments sake. Due to what must be a nightmare of trying to "fold in" the thick shell, would it be enough of an advantage to have a larger diameter "onion shell" process to overcome the in space assembly disadvantages?  I was thinking specifically if you could separate the layers into (for this theoretical scenario) say three parts, then you could more efficiently pack each launch and end up with more volume. Or am I way off base?

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #165 on: 01/29/2010 10:56 am »
Question: How the heck to they plan to outfit those modules?

I'm presuming here that they are launched in a collapsable form that inflates upon reaching orbit.  Nothing could be attached to the outer walls in such a scenario.  It strikes me that Chuck's 'axial core' concept is realistic as it is the only place you would be able to put such service lines.  Radial dividing walls can be made of flexible plastic without too much trouble but, again, nothing too substantial could be attached to them at launch.

It seems to me that a Bigelow module would need at least one outfitting flight to move equipment from its launch racks to places along the outer and radial walls.  Not to do so would be effectively to abandon the majority of the module's usable wall area to any major mission-significant role.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline ChefPat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
  • Earth, for now
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 1022
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #166 on: 01/29/2010 11:56 am »
Question: How the heck to they plan to outfit those modules?


It seems to me that a Bigelow module would need at least one outfitting flight to move equipment from its launch racks to places along the outer and radial walls. 
Why would this be a problem?
Playing Politics with Commercial Crew is Un-American!!!

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #167 on: 01/29/2010 11:58 am »
Why would this be a problem?

Because Ben wants to sell a solution. ;)
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #168 on: 01/29/2010 02:18 pm »
Question: How the heck to they plan to outfit those modules?

It seems to me that a Bigelow module would need at least one outfitting flight to move equipment from its launch racks to places along the outer and radial walls. 

Why would this be a problem?

Actually, I'm not suggesting that it is a problem.  However, it is a factor that needs to be taken into consideration when planning the use and utilisation of these modules.  They cannot, for example, be used in a 'launch and go' mission but will need to be assembled and outfitted in LEO.  This limits their application to such things as a direct ascent planetary mission.

Just remember that every mission to a hypothetical module that is 'assembly' rather than 'utilisation' is an increase in cost and decrease in revenue.  Although the history of the ISS shows that some utilisation can be carried out during the assembly of the vehicle (I am talking prior to the launch of the Destiny laboratory module), it is only on a limited scale.  For a commercial spacecraft, every minute you're not using some of its space for a revenue-generating mission, you are simply creating negative numbers on the balance sheet.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Orbital Debris

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Glad to be out of Vegas
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #169 on: 01/29/2010 06:02 pm »
Re: Bigelow Mockup images - the last four photos are interior of rigid mockups.  They are very early concepts retained for the benefit of expressing interior volumes to visitors, and do not contain the central core. 

No rotation is planned at this point.  Most designs are LEO, but the early conceptual pictures include lunar, which is why some actual have an 'up'.

I believe Bigelow put out in his business plan that an allowance was made for outfitting and maintenance. 

Offline daver

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
  • South Carolina
  • Liked: 103
  • Likes Given: 951
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #170 on: 03/17/2010 03:22 pm »
Bigeleow has a new video up on their web site.  Forgive me if it was posted else where.

http://bigelowaerospace.com/news/

There is a 2nd video on the same page but I couldn't watch the whole thing.  It had a lawyer talking about "climate change".   I guess Bigelow knows how to use the catch words to try and get money from Obama. 

Offline rklaehn

  • interplanetary telemetry plumber
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1259
  • germany
  • Liked: 191
  • Likes Given: 318
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #171 on: 03/17/2010 07:00 pm »
Question: How the heck to they plan to outfit those modules?

I'm presuming here that they are launched in a collapsable form that inflates upon reaching orbit.  Nothing could be attached to the outer walls in such a scenario.  It strikes me that Chuck's 'axial core' concept is realistic as it is the only place you would be able to put such service lines.  Radial dividing walls can be made of flexible plastic without too much trouble but, again, nothing too substantial could be attached to them at launch.

It seems to me that a Bigelow module would need at least one outfitting flight to move equipment from its launch racks to places along the outer and radial walls.  Not to do so would be effectively to abandon the majority of the module's usable wall area to any major mission-significant role.

Who says that putting the equipment at the outer wall is the best solution? I think keeping the big pieces of equipment such as life support systems and sanitary facilities in the central core would be better. That way the equipment does not have to match the curving wall and can be reached from all sides. In addition, the outer walls remain open to inspection for damage and repair. The core of a BA330 module would be about a 2m x 2m x 12m. That is a lot of room to store equipment.

Also it is not necessarily the best approach to cram each module full of equipment like ISS modules. Given a low-weight pressure vessel it might be better to distribute the equipment over a larger volume to simplify cooling.

An ISS module can not be operated at all without significant active cooling (ammonia cooling loops and radiators). Maybe a bigelow module with a larger surface area per ton of equipment can get by with mostly passive cooling.

More volume also has other advantages such as more time until a failure of the CO2 scrubber becomes critical. And the mass of the life support system does not scale with the volume of the station but with the number of occupants.

I think the lightweight pressure vessels enabled by inflatable modules require a complete rethink of how you build a space station.

Offline telomerase99

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #172 on: 04/07/2010 07:11 am »
Mike Gold is an enthusiastic character. It makes me wonder with all that extra volume if it wouldn't be possible to create resource recycling technology that is based on biological principles as opposed to physical mechanical systems that are on ISS.

In other words could you recycle urine into water with micro-organisms and air with kelp beds and could CO2 be scrubbed with plant life. Remember biosphere 2? That kind of research would be interesting!


Offline kkattula

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3008
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #173 on: 04/07/2010 07:21 am »
Mike Gold is an enthusiastic character. It makes me wonder with all that extra volume if it wouldn't be possible to create resource recycling technology that is based on biological principles as opposed to physical mechanical systems that are on ISS.

In other words could you recycle urine into water with micro-organisms and air with kelp beds and could CO2 be scrubbed with plant life. Remember biosphere 2? That kind of research would be interesting!


IMHO, that would be asking for trouble. Mechanical recycling systems have been working for decades in nuke subs. Sure they don't have to cope with zero-g and are not as mass limited as those on the ISS, but those are problems that can be addressed by better design, and/or higher mass allowances.

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #174 on: 04/07/2010 10:30 am »
ESA has long been studying bioregenerative life support under its Melissa project. There are some nice pictures of a bioreactor, but I can't find them right now. Lots of room for plants could be good for astronaut/tourist well-being as well.
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7348
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #175 on: 04/07/2010 02:24 pm »
ESA has long been studying bioregenerative life support under its Melissa project. There are some nice pictures of a bioreactor, but I can't find them right now. Lots of room for plants could be good for astronaut/tourist well-being as well.

There are tons of images and some really good papers out there on both bioregenerative life support systems (BRLSS) and closed ecological life support systems (CELSS). Google is your friend.

BTW, I am a strong supporter of these systems. But they won't fit on today's small spacecraft. We need bigger spacecraft for these to work.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #176 on: 04/07/2010 02:40 pm »
BTW, I am a strong supporter of these systems. But they won't fit on today's small spacecraft. We need bigger spacecraft for these to work.

What is the minimum size needed for these capabilities? I've seen a few sci-fi books where an entire seperate module in the crew vehicle is required for a BRLSS system but this could be exaggerated.

With current launch capabilities (assuming that cryogenic propellent transfer isn't available) I can't see there being the capability to launch anything bigger than a Mars Direct hab/lander through TOI in the immediate future.
« Last Edit: 04/07/2010 02:41 pm by Ben the Space Brit »
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #177 on: 04/07/2010 02:58 pm »
With current launch capabilities (assuming that cryogenic propellent transfer isn't available) I can't see there being the capability to launch anything bigger than a Mars Direct hab/lander through TOI in the immediate future.

Not a problem with a Lagrange staging point. And that of course would be Bigelow's next target after LEO.
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7348
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #178 on: 04/07/2010 04:02 pm »
BTW, I am a strong supporter of these systems. But they won't fit on today's small spacecraft. We need bigger spacecraft for these to work.

What is the minimum size needed for these capabilities? I've seen a few sci-fi books where an entire seperate module in the crew vehicle is required for a BRLSS system but this could be exaggerated.

Sci-fi. Want a better idea of actual size? Look at Bio-Dome 2. That supported, what? Six people? Anyone know?
« Last Edit: 04/07/2010 04:03 pm by clongton »
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3352
  • Liked: 553
  • Likes Given: 891
Re: What's Happening at Bigelow?
« Reply #179 on: 04/07/2010 07:00 pm »
Sci-fi. Want a better idea of actual size? Look at Bio-Dome 2. That supported, what? Six people? Anyone know?
Arguably, Biosphere-2 didn't demonstrate that it could successfully support any number. However, it's not really a good example, they were trying to build an entire ecosystem that replicated a bunch of natural environments (a fundamentally misguided approach for a first attempt, IMO), not optimize for size/efficiency.  You could build much more compact systems if your goal is only to close specific portions of an ECLS loops. Advances in bioengineering may help this considerably.

The Russians did some work that was much more closely applicable to spacecraft. I think there was a thread about this a while back, but a quick search didn't turn it up.

That said, I'm not sure such systems will be more reliable/lower maintenance than conventional ones, at least not at scales we can contemplate now. Keeping living things healthy in a closed environment can be at least as tricky as keeping machines healthy.


Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0