Author Topic: Which Products Can Benefit from Being Manufactured in Space / Microgravity?  (Read 8049 times)

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5974
  • Liked: 1312
  • Likes Given: 8
Which products can benefit from being manufactured in space, or in microgravity?
And how does that environment improve these products?

Offline Tywin

The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline tankat0208

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
  • New York CIty
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 30
Microgravity and variable gravity help medical and pharmaceutical research. I've heard about organ 3d printing and 3-dimensional chemical crystal manufacturing.

This is the NASA spinoff link : https://spinoff.nasa.gov/Spinoff2020/hm_5.html

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8859
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10198
  • Likes Given: 11927
Microgravity and variable gravity help medical and pharmaceutical research. I've heard about organ 3d printing and 3-dimensional chemical crystal manufacturing.

This is the NASA spinoff link : https://spinoff.nasa.gov/Spinoff2020/hm_5.html

Theoretically they might be applications for space/microgravity manufacturing, but we don't know yet.

Which is really the problem, is that there isn't anything yet that is worth industry committing to building a dedicated, free flying factory in space.

So far all we've done is experiment with the idea of zero-G or microgravity manufacturing, but what we really need is one or more companies to actually commit to doing it, in space.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Barley

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Liked: 669
  • Likes Given: 369
Arguably we've been using microgravity manufacturing since the 18th century.

Shot tower

So it is possible that a process that needs a micro gravity environment may not actually need space, particularly if product is small so that short periods of freefall are sufficient.

Offline chopsticks

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • Québec, Canada
  • Liked: 1082
  • Likes Given: 165
I can't think of anything in particular that would require microgravity for manufacturing except perhaps certain processes that would require making perfect spheres from liquid materials (and would then potentially solidify).

Where I do see a lot of usefulness is the vacuum environment of space. Thinking of uses off the top of my head, I know that a lot of resin curing is done in vacuum chambers, and having access to an infinity sized one just on the other side of the window would be really useful. Of course this process in particular requires gravity, but centrifuges could be used.

Offline high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1688
  • Europe
  • Liked: 837
  • Likes Given: 152
ZBLAN fiber optic cable is much clearer, which means far fewer energy consuming repeaters are needed. Can't be made on earth because gravity causes chrystals to form. This has been demonstrated already by Made In Space, now Redwire, but they've been quiet about it since then.

3d printing organs under gravity requires a support structure that would afterwards have to be removed physically or chemically. No gravity means you don't need that support structure. This would allow organs to be printed from the receiver's genes, avoiding a large chunk of the cost of transplantation: avoiding rejection of the organ by the body. The cost savings per kg of organ would allow quite a comfortable profit margin when printed in space, but much more research is needed before whole organs can be printed. We've only printed basic tissue on the ISS. During that additional research alternatives on earth could be discovered. So the techical risk for a commercial investor is huge.

High end chips can be made in space, as gravity causes unwanted chrystals to form. However, the company that was developing this found out that they could do it on a vomit comet by treating regular chips, no need for an expensive launch.

Stuff used in space could be made in space. This would allow you to bring a supply of all purpose, recycleable 'ink' rather than a supply of every tool you may need. That cuts down on supply costs, and keeping things tidy so you can find it when you need it is even more impossible without gravity. Made in space has done this ('sent' a tool to the ISS to be printed within 24 hours that an astronaut couldn't find his tool) and is currently working on making it recycleable

They are also working on printing with lunar regolith. Every kg you don't need to bring, is hundreds of thousands of dollars saved.

Lastly, they're working on making high end ceramic and metallic parts, without gravity that may cause weaknesses to form in the component.

Edit: and in the Redwire/Made In Space thread, they just announced they sold their first optical chrystal, which again benefit from microgravity because no/fewer imperfections form.
« Last Edit: 06/25/2022 04:09 pm by high road »

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8859
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10198
  • Likes Given: 11927
ZBLAN fiber optic cable is much clearer, which means far fewer energy consuming repeaters are needed. Can't be made on earth because gravity causes chrystals to form. This has been demonstrated already by Made In Space, now Redwire, but they've been quiet about it since then.

ZBLAN fiber optic cable is always held up as the example of why in-space manufacturing can work, but if that is so how come there are no factories in space making it?

I think it is because the economics of making "stuff" in space isn't there yet. And launch costs are certainly a HUGE part of that, but even if getting the factory to space were free, I'm not sure the economics make sense yet for fiber optic cable.

Quote
3d printing organs under gravity requires a support structure that would afterwards have to be removed physically or chemically. No gravity means you don't need that support structure. This would allow organs to be printed from the receiver's genes, avoiding a large chunk of the cost of transplantation: avoiding rejection of the organ by the body. The cost savings per kg of organ would allow quite a comfortable profit margin when printed in space, but much more research is needed before whole organs can be printed. We've only printed basic tissue on the ISS. During that additional research alternatives on earth could be discovered. So the techical risk for a commercial investor is huge.

What level of demand is there for custom printed organs?

Just because we CAN do something in space, doesn't mean there is enough of a market to build a specialized factory in space.

Quote
High end chips can be made in space, as gravity causes unwanted chrystals to form. However, the company that was developing this found out that they could do it on a vomit comet by treating regular chips, no need for an expensive launch.

I've seen no hint of modern semiconductor manufacturing being hindered by a lack of whatever zero-G solves.

Quote
Stuff used in space could be made in space. This would allow you to bring a supply of all purpose, recycleable 'ink' rather than a supply of every tool you may need. That cuts down on supply costs, and keeping things tidy so you can find it when you need it is even more impossible without gravity. Made in space has done this ('sent' a tool to the ISS to be printed within 24 hours that an astronaut couldn't find his tool) and is currently working on making it recycleable

Again, from a business standpoint there just isn't enough "demand" for doing this yet. There market is puny.

As someone that has spent decades in the manufacturing world, I look forward to the future where we do manufacturing in space. However the business conditions for doing that do not yet appear to exist in order to justify the investments needed to start manufacturing in space.

And cheap transportation to space will help, but I don't think it is the only current barrier.

As always, these types of questions are easier to answer when you don't look at the problem as a technical issue, but one guided by Supply & Demand forces...  ;)
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1688
  • Europe
  • Liked: 837
  • Likes Given: 152
ZBLAN fiber optic cable is much clearer, which means far fewer energy consuming repeaters are needed. Can't be made on earth because gravity causes chrystals to form. This has been demonstrated already by Made In Space, now Redwire, but they've been quiet about it since then.

ZBLAN fiber optic cable is always held up as the example of why in-space manufacturing can work, but if that is so how come there are no factories in space making it?

I think it is because the economics of making "stuff" in space isn't there yet. And launch costs are certainly a HUGE part of that, but even if getting the factory to space were free, I'm not sure the economics make sense yet for fiber optic cable.

It makes sense for the high end of the ZBLAN market, which goes for thousands of dollars per kg. But that high end is also a niche market. A single Crew Dragon full of payload would flood the market for years. It has the same problem as mining niche minerals in space.

The lower end of the market would need a whole industry to change from their current paradigm (cheap fiberoptic and energy intensive signal boosting) to very expensive, very efficient ZBLAN. That will likely require for the telecom industry what Tesla is doing for the car industry.

Quote
Quote
3d printing organs under gravity requires a support structure that would afterwards have to be removed physically or chemically. No gravity means you don't need that support structure. This would allow organs to be printed from the receiver's genes, avoiding a large chunk of the cost of transplantation: avoiding rejection of the organ by the body. The cost savings per kg of organ would allow quite a comfortable profit margin when printed in space, but much more research is needed before whole organs can be printed. We've only printed basic tissue on the ISS. During that additional research alternatives on earth could be discovered. So the techical risk for a commercial investor is huge.

What level of demand is there for custom printed organs?

Just because we CAN do something in space, doesn't mean there is enough of a market to build a specialized factory in space.[/quote]

Out of the 129000 transplants anually? The total costs of heart transplants runs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they're a billion dollar industry. A large part of that cost comes from keeping track of potential donors, getting their organs quickly when they die, so they don't deteriorate, and caring for the patient after the transplant to avoid the organ being rejected. Being able to print a heart, in space or otherwise, would greatly reduce the cost above, let alone the medical costs while waiting for a valid heart to become available.

And that's just hearts. What about kidneys or livers? Even though they can be harvested from living donors, being able to get your own tissues implanted and not having to hope and wait for a valid donor, or the risk of rejection of the organ, is worth a few thousand dollars. Especially with decent health insurance, which is a given in my neck of the woods. With no organs weighing more than two kg, even current crew dragon down mass costs less than that. One of the current research projects that is furthest along, is actually (part of) the eye. Not a lot of mass there.

Actually growing the organs, that's the hard part.

http://www.transplant-observatory.org/


Quote
Quote
High end chips can be made in space, as gravity causes unwanted chrystals to form. However, the company that was developing this found out that they could do it on a vomit comet by treating regular chips, no need for an expensive launch.

I've seen no hint of modern semiconductor manufacturing being hindered by a lack of whatever zero-G solves.

So you must not know much about microchips. All chip wafers have flaws. It's solved by redundancy. But if you do want high end products where you don't waste costly performance on compensating for imperfections, getting the imperfections out is one way of doing it. But it's a niche product indeed. That's why the vomit comet is a much better fit for it.

Quote
Quote
Stuff used in space could be made in space. This would allow you to bring a supply of all purpose, recycleable 'ink' rather than a supply of every tool you may need. That cuts down on supply costs, and keeping things tidy so you can find it when you need it is even more impossible without gravity. Made in space has done this ('sent' a tool to the ISS to be printed within 24 hours that an astronaut couldn't find his tool) and is currently working on making it recycleable

Again, from a business standpoint there just isn't enough "demand" for doing this yet. There market is puny.

The business from which standpoint we're talking here, is the company that owns/runs the space station. For them, it's quite significant. Not wait-2.5-years-for-the-next-supply-mission significant, but significant none the less.

Quote
As someone that has spent decades in the manufacturing world, I look forward to the future where we do manufacturing in space. However the business conditions for doing that do not yet appear to exist in order to justify the investments needed to start manufacturing in space.

And yet, the first commercial product produced in microgravity has been sold this week. Gotta start somewhere. While commercial companies are already investing in producing stuff in space. There is a lot of research still to be done to perfect all up and coming technologies.

Quote
As always, these types of questions are easier to answer when you don't look at the problem as a technical issue, but one guided by Supply & Demand forces...  ;)

Exactly. Demand for organs is billions per year, but that has large technical hurdles that need to be overcome. Demand for tools in space is minimal, but the technology has been demonstrated many times on ISS and will likely be used on all commercial stations to reduce the amount of specialized tools that needs to be kept on board with little use. The products that can be made in space like high end metallic parts will first need to prove they have better material properties before aircraft designers etc can start using them in their designs. These are all items that will take a long time before the market for them matures. A lot of support by government is still required to get these technologies to maturity and allow the markets to grow. Without that, no commercial space stations will survive.

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8859
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10198
  • Likes Given: 11927
...
Exactly. Demand for organs is billions per year, but that has large technical hurdles that need to be overcome. Demand for tools in space is minimal, but the technology has been demonstrated many times on ISS and will likely be used on all commercial stations to reduce the amount of specialized tools that needs to be kept on board with little use. The products that can be made in space like high end metallic parts will first need to prove they have better material properties before aircraft designers etc can start using them in their designs. These are all items that will take a long time before the market for them matures. A lot of support by government is still required to get these technologies to maturity and allow the markets to grow. Without that, no commercial space stations will survive.

Which is really what I'm seeing, is that there is no economic demand yet that justifies making "stuff" in space for purely capitalist ends. We can only do that today by using government funded and/or supported space facilities.

We can revisit this again in a few years...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
There are companies working on the ZBLAN thing. In particular RedWire/MadeInSpace:
https://redwirespace.com/products/fiber-optics They already demonstrated making ZBLAN on ISS in January, 2018.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1688
  • Europe
  • Liked: 837
  • Likes Given: 152
...
Exactly. Demand for organs is billions per year, but that has large technical hurdles that need to be overcome. Demand for tools in space is minimal, but the technology has been demonstrated many times on ISS and will likely be used on all commercial stations to reduce the amount of specialized tools that needs to be kept on board with little use. The products that can be made in space like high end metallic parts will first need to prove they have better material properties before aircraft designers etc can start using them in their designs. These are all items that will take a long time before the market for them matures. A lot of support by government is still required to get these technologies to maturity and allow the markets to grow. Without that, no commercial space stations will survive.

Which is really what I'm seeing, is that there is no economic demand yet that justifies making "stuff" in space for purely capitalist ends. We can only do that today by using government funded and/or supported space facilities.

We can revisit this again in a few years...

By that reasoning, commercial launch isn't viable at the moment because NASA supports all of those not-purely-capitalist companies with knowhow and contracts that they could get cheaper/more reliable elsewhere, or not at all.

I don't see much difference between NASA throwing some money/contracts at budding microgravity manufacturers or them doing the same to a company that was failing to launch their Falcon 1. Incubators are important to get new technologies of the ground, in space or otherwise.

You went from 'don't look at it from a technology perspective, look at the demand' to 'even though there's demand, the technology hurdle makes it unviable atm' rather quick 😉
« Last Edit: 06/27/2022 10:48 pm by high road »

Offline Redclaws

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
  • Liked: 860
  • Likes Given: 1047
I can't think of anything in particular that would require microgravity for manufacturing except perhaps certain processes that would require making perfect spheres from liquid materials (and would then potentially solidify).

Where I do see a lot of usefulness is the vacuum environment of space. Thinking of uses off the top of my head, I know that a lot of resin curing is done in vacuum chambers, and having access to an infinity sized one just on the other side of the window would be really useful. Of course this process in particular requires gravity, but centrifuges could be used.

Vacuum isn’t that hard to achieve on earth and the vacuum of space isn’t terribly clean.  I don’t think any of the serious space manufacturing proposals rely on it?

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11159
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 7392
  • Likes Given: 72392
Where I do see a lot of usefulness is the vacuum environment of space. Thinking of uses off the top of my head, I know that a lot of resin curing is done in vacuum chambers, and having access to an infinity sized one just on the other side of the window would be really useful. Of course this process in particular requires gravity, but centrifuges could be used.
Vacuum isn’t that hard to achieve on earth and the vacuum of space isn’t terribly clean.  I don’t think any of the serious space manufacturing proposals rely on it?

Someone/organization may want to further develop upon the Wake Shield Facility (WSF) from the mid 90s.  It created an ultra-high vacuum in microgravity as a free flyer Shuttle payload.
« Last Edit: 06/27/2022 10:58 pm by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.) My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!" Yes, there are God-given rights. Do you wish to gainsay the Declaration of Independence?

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2836
  • Liked: 1084
  • Likes Given: 33
ZBLAN really only makes sense for long subsea cables, where the total count of expensive underwater amplifiers is the driving reason for it's use. In common terrestrial cases, the gain from going from 8km to 15 km doesn't pan out as much as you are likely to have various taps along your route, allowing easy amplifier placement.

That said, that's still a lot of cable so I doubt one Dragon's worth would put a large dent in the market. There's also was the perverse feedback loop of increasing transoceanic cable capacity inviting further traffic growth, which was why Microsoft/Google/Meta(Facebook) were partially funding their own cables.

Though in light of the recent pullback against "global internet" systems with a greater focus on domestic cloud services, one could make an argument that the future undersea cable market might peak out to only replacement levels.

Separately, a lot might depend on how africa plays out, as there are many subsea cables circling the continent to provide access to coastal countries, with a slight emphasis on South Africa (due to datacenters located there).


Offline high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1688
  • Europe
  • Liked: 837
  • Likes Given: 152
ZBLAN really only makes sense for long subsea cables, where the total count of expensive underwater amplifiers is the driving reason for it's use. In common terrestrial cases, the gain from going from 8km to 15 km doesn't pan out as much as you are likely to have various taps along your route, allowing easy amplifier placement.

That said, that's still a lot of cable so I doubt one Dragon's worth would put a large dent in the market. There's also was the perverse feedback loop of increasing transoceanic cable capacity inviting further traffic growth, which was why Microsoft/Google/Meta(Facebook) were partially funding their own cables.


The cables underneath the ocean are nowhere near the applications of top grade ZBLAN that I referred to with that one Dragon worth of wire (3000kg). think high end scientific equipment, etc

Offline Surfdaddy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
  • Liked: 616
  • Likes Given: 4248
Perhaps controversial take:

1 - I think there would be very little manufacturing that would benefit. It would have to be very high value, light, and not huge quantities required, to be economical. Cheaper access to space would improve this somewhat but it's never going to be a big market IMHO.
2 - Similarly, I don't see mining in space (asteroids, etc.) to be economical in any major way unless the transport of large quantities became dirt cheap, which I'm not sure how that happens. The one potential use of mining in space is for the local settlement (Mars or moon, etc.) at or very near the settlement itself.

Edit: Spelling
« Last Edit: 06/28/2022 06:17 pm by Surfdaddy »

Offline Redclaws

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
  • Liked: 860
  • Likes Given: 1047
Perhaps controversial take:

1 - I think there would be very little manufacturing that would benefit. It would have to be very high value, light, and not huge quantities required, to be economical. Cheaper acces to space would improve this somewhat but it's never going to be a big market IMHO.
2 - Similarly, I don't see mining in space (asteroids, etc.) to be economical in any major way unless the transport of large quantities became dirt cheap, which I'm not sure how that happens. The one potential use of mining in space is for the local settlement (Mars or moon, etc.) at or very near the settlement itself.

Re 2. Certain very valuable precious metals come close-ish to closing the cost equations for launch today, though I believe that requires some really rosy assumptions about the cost and practicality of actual mining.  It’s hard to see how (effectively) zero g mining would be other than quite challenging.

Offline Tomness

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 660
  • Into the abyss will I run
  • Liked: 289
  • Likes Given: 737
Helium-3, 0², H², D²O. Water, Rocket Fuel, Air, Fusion Reactors or Generators.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
I've read that ball bearings can be made in zero G perfectly without machining.  Also radio crystals. 

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1