Quote from: fortynineundefeated on 02/08/2018 01:30 pmQuote from: Ionmars on 10/06/2017 12:10 pm......The release of the vessel may be easier on Mars surface. We proposed a "vessel grappler" that could remove the vessel from the side. Also the half-fairing is a removable panel rather than hinged, so it is removed and set aside.......Sorry if this was answered elsewhere, but how would these grapplers or the crane in your paper be delivered to the surface? One approach would have us design "kits" of component parts to assemble a large crane or a vessel-grappler. The parts would have to be small enough to fit inside the cargo bay of a BFS/spaceship and must fit through a cargo bay door. (A good reason for doors to be as large as feasible) A small crane would unload parts, as pictured by E. Musk. Components of a large crane pr a VG may require multiple spaceship landings. If cargo modules are employed for early flights, parts would be packed into cargo modules and the modules unloaded by crane or VG. In either case, humans would assemble any large and complicated machine (not self-deployed).
Quote from: Ionmars on 10/06/2017 12:10 pm......The release of the vessel may be easier on Mars surface. We proposed a "vessel grappler" that could remove the vessel from the side. Also the half-fairing is a removable panel rather than hinged, so it is removed and set aside.......Sorry if this was answered elsewhere, but how would these grapplers or the crane in your paper be delivered to the surface?
......The release of the vessel may be easier on Mars surface. We proposed a "vessel grappler" that could remove the vessel from the side. Also the half-fairing is a removable panel rather than hinged, so it is removed and set aside.......
Quote from: Ionmars on 02/28/2018 04:40 am......One approach would have us design "kits" of component parts to assemble a large crane or a vessel-grappler. The parts would have to be small enough to fit inside the cargo bay of a BFS/spaceship and must fit through a cargo bay door. (A good reason for doors to be as large as feasible) A small crane would unload parts, as pictured by E. Musk. Components of a large crane pr a VG may require multiple spaceship landings. If cargo modules are employed for early flights, parts would be packed into cargo modules and the modules unloaded by crane or VG. In either case, humans would assemble any large and complicated machine (not self-deployed). ... ...On earth, very large crawler cranes are put together from road transportable pieces using smaller cranes that are themselves road transportable. So talking to crane manufacturers (rather than say, LockMart, who will want 1.5M USD to tell you that yes, you want your crane to be modular) might bear a lot of fruit. The operating environment might be different but they are already used to the notion of making equipment easy to assemble in the field without a lot of tools or complex support equipment. So the shipboard crane unloads a rover mounted crane (which had lots of supplies packed around it in transit) which then is used to assemble a larger crane, etc. as well as other port equipment.
......One approach would have us design "kits" of component parts to assemble a large crane or a vessel-grappler. The parts would have to be small enough to fit inside the cargo bay of a BFS/spaceship and must fit through a cargo bay door. (A good reason for doors to be as large as feasible) A small crane would unload parts, as pictured by E. Musk. Components of a large crane pr a VG may require multiple spaceship landings. If cargo modules are employed for early flights, parts would be packed into cargo modules and the modules unloaded by crane or VG. In either case, humans would assemble any large and complicated machine (not self-deployed). ... ...
Maybe John Alan knows someone that knows someone? (He works at CAT)
Wouldn't a large tele-handler make more sense as a machine to load and unload BFS?... Obviously one made for OP in a no air environment... electric drive, etc...Here is a generic one in action to get the basic concept across...
Amazing development. Maybe their process could surpass the Sabatier process for producing CH4 from CO2 and H2?Who in NASA should the new startup company contact? Added: Sabatier reaction has the advantage of being exothermic. Excess heat can be used to drive the electrolysis process that splits H2O to produce H2 used in Sabatier process. That's why we suggested placing the two processes together in the same reactor-module. May be difficult for any new process to beat this combination, energy-wise.
Added: Sabatier reaction has the advantage of being exothermic.
https://phys.org/news/2018-03-startup-scales-carbon-nanotube-membranes.htmlAn interesting possibility for a Mars Chemical Industry/ ISRU.
So talking to crane manufacturers (rather than say, LockMart, who will want 1.5M USD to tell you that yes, you want your crane to be modular) might bear a lot of fruit.
Quote from: Ludus on 03/12/2018 11:14 pmhttps://phys.org/news/2018-03-startup-scales-carbon-nanotube-membranes.htmlAn interesting possibility for a Mars Chemical Industry/ ISRU.It may be a useful development. But something is off. You can not just send CO2 and water through a membrane and get a hydrocarbon as a result. You need energy to drive the process. As much or really more energy than can be gained by burning that hydrocarbon. Otherwise it would be a perpetual motion machine.Maybe it is just bad reporting by phys.org but it makes it suspect.
"This technology gives us a level of control over the material world that we've never had before," said Mattershift Founder and CEO, Dr. Rob McGinnis. "We can choose which molecules can pass through our membranes and what happens to them when they do. For example, right now we're working to remove CO2 from the air and turn it into fuels. This has already been done using conventional technology, but it's been too expensive to be practical. Using our tech, I think we'll be able to produce carbon-zero gasoline, diesel, and jet fuels that are cheaper than fossil fuels."
Quote from: Ionmars on 03/14/2018 07:37 pmAdded: Sabatier reaction has the advantage of being exothermic. .....Exothermic means inherently lossy. If the heat can be used elsewhere it mitigates the initial loss. But the process itself is still lossy.