Next generation space station architecture

[SpacexULA]

We need another shuttle to build another space station.

No we don't, all american launched sections of the ISS could have been launched on Atlas.

[neilh]

This is potentially an interesting question, but currently ill-formed. It's a little bit like asking what the most efficient next-generation terrestrial building would be.

[LegendCJS]

To start putting some rules down:

I don't think you are going to find a tourist/ hotel station in the same orbit as a science/ research station or a beo mission assembly/fuel-depo station.

Tourist station will be in orbits that fly over a majority of the land on the planet so each guest can get a good look at their home cities from space.

Tourist stations will be separate form science/ zero-g important manufacture stations due to concerns of vibration and keeping pure micro-gravity conditions for the processes that depend on them.

Long term I think BEO mission assembly/fuel depot stations will be in orbits most suited to BEO flight and maximizing upmass.

So from this argument you might conclude that a future station will not be as multi-function as some suggestions so far in this thread.

[IRobot]

I think I've not been very clear with my question. I'm not interested in leading the answer. I don't propose modules as we have now (just did it as an example).

Start with a clean sheet and the basic thing is that it is at least 10x bigger (let's say in mass) than ISS.

I would like opinions on scaled up modules, wheels, everything.
And an analysis on if the current architecture works/doesn't work scaled up.

Feel free to imagine it as an Hotel, a factory, a science lab, etc...

[pathfinder_01]

I think I've not been very clear with my question. I'm not interested in leading the answer. I don't propose modules as we have now (just did it as an example).

Start with a clean sheet and the basic thing is that it is at least 10x bigger (let's say in mass) than ISS.

I would like opinions on scaled up modules, wheels, everything.
And an analysis on if the current architecture works/doesn't work scaled up.

Feel free to imagine it as an Hotel, a factory, a science lab, etc...

There are a lot of issues with this. For one it depends on what is it's function.  Think of a space station like a house or a building. It's function defines what it needs. A stater house or vacation house or one for a retired couple only needs 1-2 bed rooms. A House for a family of four esp. if the children are not the same gender needs atleast 3. An University needs lecture halls and labs, an office building does not.

Also why scale up? Past 20 ton, maybe 50 ton modules there is no near term rocket that can lift it. With modules past 20 tons there are major issuses with building and tranporing them on the ground.

Also mass is not the same as volume...you could increase the ISS's mass 10 fold by sending up lead bricks. Ofcourse the ISS's control systems won't be able to handle the extra mass and the more massive the station the more propellant it will need to do maunvuers but that is another story.

[Joris]

Why not build a wheel like 2001?

YES!

When the moment comes that we have the need of space stations 10x as big as the current ISS, we probably won't launch them in modules. It may be cheaper to set up a module factory on the moon where they are made, and then send to earth orbit, than to launch them from earth. (When you are talking about space stations that are 10x bigger than the ISS, and there will also probably be a lot more space stations than 1 or 2.)

[simonbp]

The biggest recent proposal I've seen is the Reaction Engines Orbital Base Station:

http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/obs.html

Other than that, you should look at the old studies for Saturn V-launched stations:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19630009160

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19700071805

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19700018358

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19730063332

(That'll keep you busy for a while!  )

[saturnapollo]

Well this was my attempt some time ago at coming up with a futuristic space station. Admittedly very large, but with small docking arms for visiting spaceplanes and the larger ones for various interplanetary craft.

Keith

[MikeAtkinson]

I don't think a single station is the way forward.

Look at potential applications:

1. zero g lab
2. variable g lab
3. space hotel
4. construction shack
5. propellant depot
6. L2 gateway
7. asteroid mining base

Most of these have requirements (orbits, vibration, size, power) that preclude their use in other applications.

However I think they can all be built up out of a few standard modules. Using only a few types of modules a diverse range of special purpose stations can be constructed.

The trick will be determining a small set of modules so that they can be produced on a production line, and that require little to no customization for their use in different station designs. A small number of modules would allow alternate suppliers for each module type (same spec, different designs)

From what (relatively little) I know of ISS design, it seems to be that its equipment practice (racks, external points, etc) is a good base for future developments.

It looks like both berthing and docking will be required. Propellant transfer to a service module is likely to be a requirement for some station types.

As regards to module size one possibility maybe Columbus module size (10 tonnes, 4.5m diameter, 7m long) to fit on a wide variety of launch vehicles. Another would be flying some modules without fairing say 20 tonnes, 5.4m diameter, 12m long. Some modules could be inflatable, especially those used for accommodation and logistics storage. Really big modules that max out the SLS capacity would be possible, but it is I think a mistake to limit launcher options to only one vehicle.

[blasphemer]

Bigelow showed some fancy space station concepts, including an 8300 m3 behemoth:

http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/979120-bigelow-aerospace-long-term/

[sdsds]

I don't think a single station is the way forward.

Or at least you have to question that assumption. The OP seemed to be a question essentially about whether the approach to station assembly that involves using a robotic arm and something like the ISS common berthing mechanism would scale up.

Maybe it would, but it probably isn't the best way to scale up! At some point having physical connections between the pieces adds system-wide risk that could be reduced by putting the pieces in different places, "connected" by vehicles that move people and cargo between them.

Some pieces could be bigger, like cities; some smaller, like towns.

Imagine asking if the European model of cities could scale up so that only one large city was needed for all the population of North America!

[RyanC]

We need another shuttle to build another space station.

Incorrect. We can do it just fine with SLS to put S-II sized modules into orbit.

[Jim]

We need another shuttle to build another space station.

Incorrect. We can do it just fine with SLS to put S-II sized modules into orbit.

Incorrect, don't need SLS either nor S-II sized modules

[DarkenedOne]

Lets first recognize that the space stations we build now are not nearly as efficient in terms of habitable volume, energy, for a given mass as they could be.  Remember each section of the habitable module has to have radiation, vacuum, and ballistic protection.

For this reason it is better to have a few very large modules than lots of very small ones. 

The structure for the stations that currently exist was chosen because it was the easiest to assemble in space. 

[DarkenedOne]

What we need to do is go from building space stations like this.


To building space stations like this


Right now space stations are built in modules that are flown up as one large piece and docked to other modules.  The practical result of this is that you cannot have a room bigger than your biggest rocket.

What we need to do is to develop the technology to build space stations like we build other large structures like buildings and ships.  Of course this requires much more assembly work to be done in space.  Pieces would also have to be fitted together with more complicated methods like welding.